Unlikely Victories. - Page 2




 
--
 
July 11th, 2005  
Welshwarrior
 
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Whispering Death
Well, you have to kind of determine what you mean by unlikely victories over technology.

For example, you could say the N. Vietnamese because they where technologically outclassed, but they paid for their victory in the millions of dead vietnamese whereas America suffered only 50,000 dead.
But they still won. The means justifies the end?
July 12th, 2005  
Whispering Death
 
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Welshwarrior
But they still won. The means justifies the end?
No, you misunderstand what I'm saying. Technology is only one factor in warfare. Mass is another factor and is, in fact, one of the origional principles of warfare as enumerated by Clauswitz.

So in Vietnam, mass overpowered technology but is that really an unlikely victory? Or is it really just simply the MASS overpowering the numerical multipliers that technology gives, which is what happened.
July 12th, 2005  
Whispering Death
 
 
Oh, and at "Blackhawk Down" the helos where flying low and slow, it isn't that difficult of a shot and RPGs are capable of downing a helo.
--
July 12th, 2005  
chewie_nz
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Whispering Death
Quote:
Originally Posted by Welshwarrior
But they still won. The means justifies the end?
No, you misunderstand what I'm saying. Technology is only one factor in warfare. Mass is another factor and is, in fact, one of the origional principles of warfare as enumerated by Clauswitz.

So in Vietnam, mass overpowered technology but is that really an unlikely victory? Or is it really just simply the MASS overpowering the numerical multipliers that technology gives, which is what happened.
the north vietnamese didn't defeat the US forces, the US media & public opinion did.
July 12th, 2005  
Welshwarrior
 
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by chewie_nz
Quote:
Originally Posted by Whispering Death
Quote:
Originally Posted by Welshwarrior
But they still won. The means justifies the end?
No, you misunderstand what I'm saying. Technology is only one factor in warfare. Mass is another factor and is, in fact, one of the origional principles of warfare as enumerated by Clauswitz.

So in Vietnam, mass overpowered technology but is that really an unlikely victory? Or is it really just simply the MASS overpowering the numerical multipliers that technology gives, which is what happened.
the north vietnamese didn't defeat the US forces, the US media & public opinion did.
No? Who took South Vietnam? The Press?
July 12th, 2005  
chewie_nz
 
it's an over simplification, sure but public opinion surely didn't do the cause any good. the US was always restraining themselves in relation to numbers of troops stationed in country. trying to win with tech rather than sheer numbers.

the US left, charlie moved in.
July 12th, 2005  
Welshwarrior
 
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by chewie_nz
it's an over simplification, sure but public opinion surely didn't do the cause any good. the US was always restraining themselves in relation to numbers of troops stationed in country. trying to win with tech rather than sheer numbers.

the US left, charlie moved in.
Not what the history books say.
July 12th, 2005  
Whispering Death
 
 
Nah, Chewie is actually right. So long as the USA stood guard over S.Vietnam the country was independent and 'relatively' stable. When the US public ran out of "stomach" for the war they pulled out and S.Vietnam crumbled under the millitary might of the N.Vietnamese.

It's pretty sad actually, but it's actually a better example of how propogandist warfare is the most effective against democratic societies, something that islamic fundamentalists have learned very well. Maybe all the millitary power of Western societities will fail to protect them as the lessons from Vietnam arm their enemies with the tools to unlocking the inherent weakness of democratic systems, the lack of political will because they're dependent on the emotions of their voters.
July 12th, 2005  
Welshwarrior
 
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Whispering Death
Nah, Chewie is actually right. So long as the USA stood guard over S.Vietnam the country was independent and 'relatively' stable. When the US public ran out of "stomach" for the war they pulled out and S.Vietnam crumbled under the millitary might of the N.Vietnamese.

It's pretty sad actually, but it's actually a better example of how propogandist warfare is the most effective against democratic societies, something that islamic fundamentalists have learned very well. Maybe all the millitary power of Western societities will fail to protect them as the lessons from Vietnam arm their enemies with the tools to unlocking the inherent weakness of democratic systems, the lack of political will because they're dependent on the emotions of their voters.
Well further to that maybe you would like to eplain how that sits with the following:

US troops ordered to avoid London (From the BBC)

RAF Lakenheath is one of the bases affected
Thousands of US military personnel based in the UK have been banned by commanders from travelling to London in the wake of Thursday's bomb attacks.

Details of the travel ban, enforced on Friday, emerged as US President George W Bush said the US would "not retreat in the face of terrorists" .

He said: "In this difficult hour, the people of Great Britain can know the American people stand with you."

Well Thanks for that George. Comments gents?
July 12th, 2005  
Missileer
 
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Welshwarrior
Quote:
Originally Posted by Whispering Death
Nah, Chewie is actually right. So long as the USA stood guard over S.Vietnam the country was independent and 'relatively' stable. When the US public ran out of "stomach" for the war they pulled out and S.Vietnam crumbled under the millitary might of the N.Vietnamese.

It's pretty sad actually, but it's actually a better example of how propogandist warfare is the most effective against democratic societies, something that islamic fundamentalists have learned very well. Maybe all the millitary power of Western societities will fail to protect them as the lessons from Vietnam arm their enemies with the tools to unlocking the inherent weakness of democratic systems, the lack of political will because they're dependent on the emotions of their voters.
Well further to that maybe you would like to eplain how that sits with the following:

US troops ordered to avoid London (From the BBC)

RAF Lakenheath is one of the bases affected
Thousands of US military personnel based in the UK have been banned by commanders from travelling to London in the wake of Thursday's bomb attacks.

Details of the travel ban, enforced on Friday, emerged as US President George W Bush said the US would "not retreat in the face of terrorists" .

He said: "In this difficult hour, the people of Great Britain can know the American people stand with you."

Well Thanks for that George. Comments gents?
That order has been rescinded.