That's reassuring.
Sorry to the bunches of innocent victims thru history

Pretty accurate.

Guess we need to invade another Middle Eastern country, then - we'll totally get it right this time.

How much time are we supposed to give it to adjust to our current wars?

Yeah..."over time" being the operative phrase here. Just give them another 10 years and they'll have this Iraq motherfarker nailed.

DamnYankees: How much time are we supposed to give it to adjust to our current wars?

Depends how long it takes Obama to convince the "Good Old Boyz" in the military and intelligence communities that the homosexual Arabic translators are more a threat to the Caliphascists than to the American Way Of Life.

DamnYankees: How much time are we supposed to give it to adjust to our current wars?

depends. Odierno adapted pretty well in Iraq.

Eddie Adams from Torrance: Yeah..."over time" being the operative phrase here. Just give them another 10 years and they'll have this Iraq motherfarker nailed.

For as long as it has existed, the US Military has always had the perfect technology, strategy and personnel required to successfully win the previous war.

The U.S. military is the least proactive and most reactive organization of all time.

Shorter version: War is a racket.

I can't wait until this goes green and all the "Marine Core" tards start spouting nonsense.

One thing that they could do to speed up the learning process would be to hire some Soviet advisers. I'm sure that the ex Soviet Union learned a few things in Afghanistan that we might want to take into account.

Never mind the fact that the United States military does the best job out of any military in the world.

Eddie Adams from Torrance: Yeah..."over time" being the operative phrase here. Just give them another 10 years and they'll have this Iraq motherfarker nailed.

As much as I disagree with our reasons for going to war and the way it was fought at the beginning. General Petraeus did a remarkable job forcing a new strategy down the army's throat when it didn't want to listen.

Laz Long: One thing that they could do to speed up the learning process would be to hire some Soviet advisers. I'm sure that the ex Soviet Union learned a few things in Afghanistan that we might want to take into account.

"Don't do it" won't help at this point.

One thing that they could do to speed up the learning process would be to hire some Soviet advisers. I'm sure that the ex Soviet Union learned a few things in Afghanistan that we might want to take into account.

Like not selling weapons to the Taliban.

Never mind the fact that the United States military does the best job out of any military in the world.

Two years after the enemy has already taken a beating from your allies.

There can be no greater example than the Civil War. Talk about something that was a huge bloody mess until the army got its ducks in a row and followed a single strategy.

SchlingFocker: The U.S. military is the least proactive and most reactive organization of all time.

Hmm, Department of Defense reactive? You don't say.

SilentStrider: DamnYankees: How much time are we supposed to give it to adjust to our current wars?

depends. Odierno adapted pretty well in Iraq.

After his disastrous command of the 4th Infantry Division, I'd be hard to get any worse.

must have sucked to have been the first paratrooper then.

AiryAnne: Hmm, Department of Defense reactive? You don't say.

No large institution can change their course quickly. It's like watching a massive container ship change course... it takes ages. Rapid movements only cause instability.

"War is hell....especially on the uniform."

shadylookin: must have sucked to have been the first paratrooper then.

It sucks to be the first one in, in any situation.


/except your mom.
//ill be here all week...
///try the veal?

shadylookin: must have sucked to have been the first paratrooper then.

They were called screamintroopers.

Thankful and proud they are on my side. Screw Michelle and Holder.

>> "The history of the US military is that it never does anything right the first time, but over time, it adjusts very effectively for a large institution"

The nature of the job that the military does means that often when they don't get it right lots and lots of people end up dead.

These weasel words about "adjusting" over time mean squat.

When you have a real job out in the real world they don't allow you to fark things up until you have time to "adjust".

The problem with the military is they blindly obey orders without questioning why they need to be fulfilled.

NewportBarGuy: Pretty accurate.

extremely accurate. anyone who thinks different needs to go look up Operation Torch.

FloydA: Eddie Adams from Torrance: Yeah..."over time" being the operative phrase here. Just give them another 10 years and they'll have this Iraq motherfarker nailed.

For as long as it has existed, the US Military has always had the perfect technology, strategy and personnel required to successfully win the previous war.

Honestly, that is surprisingly descriptive of many large institutions.

Schadenfreude ist die schoenste Freude: I can't wait until this goes green and all the "Marine Core" tards start spouting nonsense.

It is CORPS not CORE.

epyonyx: Schadenfreude ist die schoenste Freude: I can't wait until this goes green and all the "Marine Core" tards start spouting nonsense.

It is CORPS not CORE.

That didn't take long. Nice fish in.

randomjsa: Never mind the fact that the United States military does the best job out of any military in the world.

Which military? The one that destroyed all of Saddam's weapons and WMDS within the first month of Clinton's 1998 bombing campaign? Or the one that Bush used to destroy the Iraqi security establishment and let Al Qaeda thrive once again, even to the point of creating new cyanide and ricin labs in the US-patrolled no-fly zone?

They say Afghanistan is different from Iraq, where increasing troop numbers did actually improve the situation on the ground.

That should actually read "turning a blind eye to the ethnic cleansing of four million people and bribing the militias to stop killing us improved the situation".

epyonyx: It is CORPS not CORE.

Whooosh.

Outshined_One

FloydA: Eddie Adams from Torrance: Yeah..."over time" being the operative phrase here. Just give them another 10 years and they'll have this Iraq motherfarker nailed.

For as long as it has existed, the US Military has always had the perfect technology, strategy and personnel required to successfully win the previous war.

Honestly, that is surprisingly descriptive of many large institutions.

Maybe, but I know a lot of large institutions that get it wrong at first and don't adjust.

The idea that something called "the surge" is some brilliant strategy that changed everything in Iraq is vastly over simplified, and mostly false.

First of all, sending more troops is not a new idea. Geerals got fired, and ignored, prior to the invasion for suggesting that we needed many thousands more troops for the occupation. They were right.

The biggest things that changed the situation in Iraq were:

1: We started bribing the Sunnis, and they stopped fighting us.

2: Al Sadr ordered his Shiite militia men to stand down, and they did.

3: The "ethnic cleansing" of the major cities, including Baghdad, lead to less violence, because you can only kill people once, and eventually the Sunnis and Shiites were separated into their own neighborhoods with 20 foot walls around them.

4: And yes, sending more troops to the capitol helped. But to ignore all of the above, and claim Petraeus came up with some brilliant strategy, is silly, and not true.

>> "The history of the US military is that it never does anything right the first time, but over time, it adjusts very effectively for a large institution"

Not winning in Korea, Vietnam and Iraq (when you have vastly superior forces) would be more like not getting it right 3 times in a row.

Only the military would be allowed a "get out of jail free" card like that.

Friggin incompetents.

waiting for Civil War II: Bolt Action Bugalloo

Bob16: The nature of the job that the military does means that often when they don't get it right lots and lots of people end up dead.

These weasel words about "adjusting" over time mean squat.

When you have a real job out in the real world they don't allow you to fark things up until you have time to "adjust".

Why do you seem to be getting mad about a valid observation of the military?

it should adjust well over time. we feed those kittens over a half Trillion/year of tax money.

epyonyx: Schadenfreude ist die schoenste Freude: I can't wait until this goes green and all the "Marine Core" tards start spouting nonsense.

It is CORPS not CORE.

If you said that to me or any other Marine Core soldiers in real life they'd beat the crap out of you. Every jughead would give up his life to defend the Core from pansy civilians like you.

Having done a ginormous amount of U.S. history research in the effort to construct the family trees of my German, Irish, and English ancestors...

...I'm just amazed at the lack of knowledge most Americans have of their heritage and history, and the fervor which many or said individuals use to propel their uninformed arguments.

Am I lookin' at you?

At least our military doesn't go down in flames like the euro countries do, LOL...

Bob16: >> "The history of the US military is that it never does anything right the first time, but over time, it adjusts very effectively for a large institution"

Not winning in Korea, Vietnam and Iraq (when you have vastly superior forces) would be more like not getting it right 3 times in a row.

Only the military would be allowed a "get out of jail free" card like that.

Friggin incompetents.

To be fair in Korea they were forced to fight millions of Chinese solders and not allowed to escalate the war to attack bases on the Mainland.

In both Vietnam and Iraq they went in with terrible strategies and did a pretty good job of adapting just in both cases we realized the reasons for the wars were wrong and there was no national will to support the fight.

Insurgent wars are measured in decades and unless we have a damn good reason for fighting one the public will never support it that long.

"The Americans will always do the right thing... After they've exhausted all the alternatives."

- Winston Churchill

Um, yeah, NATO is rumored to be rather worthless in Afghanistan. ISAF is said to stand for "I Saw Americans Fighting". As far as the enemy sneaking in from Pakistan, that's a red herring. The enemy has stuck around Afghanistan due to the mild winter. That's why the death toll is so high these past two months. As for this commentator in particular, I say that a "surge" will work in Afghanistan, just like it worked for the US in WWII, WWI, US Civil War, etc.

"When you have a real job out in the real world they don't allow you to fark things up until you have time to 'adjust'."

Yes, they do. Practically the whole IT world works on adjusting work (software and hardware)...till it works and goes into 'production'.

I can think of so many industries where you never even plan on the first attempt being perfect....it's why testing phases are required for so many things.

Your hatred, or small mindedness is clouding your judgement.
Not a rational observation at all...

Let the military run the military and the politics run the country

Last time I checked, no foreign invader is even thinking of attacking our shores. Other the the Mexicans, because we are not allowed to shoot them.

NewportBarGuy: Pretty accurate.


Jim Dunnigan wrote a whole book about this called "War Done Right."

Historically, America goes unprepared into wars and has a few initial disasters, then adjusts.