http://blogcritics.org/ A sinister cabal of superior bloggers on music, books, film, popular culture, politics, and technology - updated continuously. en Copyright 2002-2006 by the authors Mon, 5 Jan 2004 08:00:11 EST http://backend.userland.com/rss Blogcritics.org custom software http://blogcritics.org/archives/2003/12/04/154348.php#comment-35161 Greetings, Great comments! As to the guerilla war, my comment was "the military has shown the world is that we cannot yet fight a guerilla war" and I think that comment is vaild, however, that notion (and that fact) is changing day by day as the military continues in Iraq. You made the comment "If the political end would simply tell the US Military that they will have to fight a war against terrorist and they will have to support it 100 percent or hand in their resignation, the military would be able to do a better job than we do now....If you had money, on which type of war would you influence politicians to push for? " I totally agree, but what I didn't think about when writing that post was the business aspect. The sad truth is that individuals may (and have in the past) pushed for large wars simply for the economic reasons and not due to the military goal. Also - "The military does what our leaders ask and direct them to do, and they do it extremely well. And if they get in harms way while achieving that goal, they die for us too." Yes, and God bless them and thank them for it too. Without the individuals who does this, largely thankless task, the US would not be the country it is today. ]]> 35161@blogcritics.org Mon, 5 Jan 2004 08:00:11 EST http://blogcritics.org/archives/2003/12/04/154348.php#comment-35155 The last three paragraphs in your article are interesting. In the first you point a finger at the military as being different as with Jessica Lynch verses WWII. Is correct, but the military is mirroring what the current political environment is allowing them too. They may have been "under orders", Naaaaa trying to put a "positive spin" on having the first female POW returned. I would also say to justify their being in Iraq. It's just too weird to try and figure out just what they were thinking to present it in that manor. Too much political pressure, micro management and bad planning is forcing the spin-doctors to try and put every thing in a positive spin! It's a change from the past! In the second, you indicate that we, our military, cannot fight a guerilla war. That I can say is 100 percent wrong! Politicians cannot fight a guerilla war. Included in the politician list are the guys wearing one or more stars on their shoulder or having a title like the "Sectary of Something" or "Assistant Secretary of Something." If the political end would simply tell the US Military that they will have to fight a war against terrorist and they will have to support it 100 percent or hand in their resignation, the military would be able to do a better job than we do now. Big rank wants big out fits to fight with so that they can get their ticket punched for promotion. We can do better! We can fight at that level and win! Just don't have the understanding and support at the top! Every body wants to be like the WWII officers like Eisenhower, Patton, and all the rest of the WWII generals. It's not pride or conceit It's plain stupidity of our military and political leaders! A small war has at the most AR-15, machine guns, recoilless rifles, mortars and mines. A large war has battalions, armor tanks by the hundreds, battleships, fleets of fighters and aircraft carriers! If you were a businessman making war material, which war would you fight for to make money on? If you had money, on which type of war would you influence politicians to push for? Simply throwing money and large forces at the problem will not insure victory; just ask the GIs that fought in Viet Nam. The military does what our leaders ask and direct them to do, and they do it extremely well. And if they get in harms way while achieving that goal, they die for us too. ]]> 35155@blogcritics.org Mon, 5 Jan 2004 04:47:23 EST