50
50
0
Two recent, interesting articles. One from The Atlantic, one from Salon (and I'll acknowledge the bias of Salon from the get go, so no one needs to spend time attacking the source; The Atlantic, though, is, as they say, "of no party or clique."
Do you agree the US win-lose record since 1945 is 1-4? Do you agree that the US loses wars precisely because it is so powerful? Why haven't Eisenhower's warnings about the military-industrial complex led to any sort of meaningful controls on the DoD budget?
http://www.theatlantic.com/international/archive/2015/06/america-win-loss-iraq-afghanistan/394559/
http://www.salon.com/2015/05/16/the_dwight_eisenhower_lesson_america_forgot_partner/
Do you agree the US win-lose record since 1945 is 1-4? Do you agree that the US loses wars precisely because it is so powerful? Why haven't Eisenhower's warnings about the military-industrial complex led to any sort of meaningful controls on the DoD budget?
http://www.theatlantic.com/international/archive/2015/06/america-win-loss-iraq-afghanistan/394559/
http://www.salon.com/2015/05/16/the_dwight_eisenhower_lesson_america_forgot_partner/
Posted >1 y ago
Responses: 189
I dont think the military in general has lost, but of course I am biased on that! When winning hearts and minds become a combative objective, we have lost the objective. We lose when it becomes political. How polical was Gen. Patton?
(0)
(0)
I hate to think the perception is that we "lose" wars, we might lose public opinion because of our politicians. Let the Generals fight the wars and the outcome would be a lot better.
(0)
(0)
I have a question to everybody there was world war I those world war II how many of the battles have we fought since then were declared wars?
I know Korea was a police action I know Vietnam was never declared a war I'm not sure about what others maybe you can help me?
I know Korea was a police action I know Vietnam was never declared a war I'm not sure about what others maybe you can help me?
(0)
(0)
It was 25 years ago when the average people of a small city in Montana “joined together to stand up to hate when their neighbors were under attack,” as the Not in Our Town website reminds us.
The town was Billings. The neighbors were Jewish, Black and Native American. The attackers were white supremacists. The average people standing up to hate were, for the most part, white people who, like most people of all colors, were offended by racism and anti-Semitism. That was then. This is now. The city is Kenosha … or Portland … or Seattle. The neighbors under attack are police officers or business people or any white people. The attackers are Black Lives Matter activists or antifa. The average people standing up to hate are — for the most part — missing in action.
What the hell happened to America in the last 25 years?
The town was Billings. The neighbors were Jewish, Black and Native American. The attackers were white supremacists. The average people standing up to hate were, for the most part, white people who, like most people of all colors, were offended by racism and anti-Semitism. That was then. This is now. The city is Kenosha … or Portland … or Seattle. The neighbors under attack are police officers or business people or any white people. The attackers are Black Lives Matter activists or antifa. The average people standing up to hate are — for the most part — missing in action.
What the hell happened to America in the last 25 years?
(0)
(0)
The American fighting man has never lost a war! Our spineless politicians have given away a few.
(0)
(0)
According to Clausewitz, We need to cut off our enemies source of supply. We refuse to cut the enemy off from their source of supply as we are unwilling to risk widening the war and choose perpetual war. According to Mazlovs theory of needs, we must remove the enemies motivation for war or beat them down so low they choose anything but war. The second option is politically unacceptable. The first is unachievable since we don't understand our enemies motivation and change it the problem to something we understand. So, we waste our people trying to solve a problem which does not exist.
(0)
(0)
I challenge you to name a single war that “we”, the military, have lost. Any war that didn’t end in a decisive victory was due to weak politicians. Every war before Korea ended in a decisive victory. Korea-weak politicians, Vietnam-weak politicians, the fact that we had to go to Iraq twice-weak politicians, the fact that the war Afghanistan became a stalemate-weak politicians. I firmly believe that when politicians decide to send the military to war, the military leaders should be the ones who decide how to fight and, when to call it “over”. Until then, the politicians should have NO say in how or what we do. Then, and only then, will we have a decisive victory in every single conflict. “We” will never lose against ANY nation. Not China, or Russia, or Iran, or anyone else. We’re trained better and, we have superior equipment. There’s no one who can beat us, except our own politicians. THEY lost Korea, Vietnam, and Afghanistan. Not us!
(0)
(0)
America land of the free home of the brave.We are asked to intervene on another country problems and we come to the rescue with bravery and heroism.We get scared when we hit the ground but after a few bullets Wis by we are ok lol not really,we return fire.Sometimes we fire first.In any event I believe we are the police of the world has Col.Porter put it.Soldiers don't lose wars The Hill loses wars.Generals are asked to clean up situations and really they are being set up for failure they take the blame and retire and move on to the next chapter in their life.Now you say I can't say that because the Hill is America,no wrong We the People are America not The Hill.Im sorry if my unorthodox thinking doesn't suit your brain.
(0)
(0)
Read This Next


USA
Iraq
Afghanistan
Politics
Vietnam War
