More proof of total ignorance or willful misdirection from the left

[1stNickD]

MSN

This article pretends that missiles and jet fighters do not exist. From a very dishonest accounting of the first Gulf War, led by Powell's strategy and Schawrtzkophs (<sp?), execution of that strategy with air power, to the near total destruction of many Ukraine's cities by bombers and missiles, this article pretends that both examples war are by tanks and other armour only. Sources such as the one who supplied this article have been calling for the decimation of our defense capabilities for a very long time. You can bet the bank that this is just another step in their battle to emaciate our ability to defend ourselves. Modern warfare has been led by air power, with the armour coming in after threats have been neutralized or at least marginalized from the air. In the first Gulf war the tanks did not roll until after weeks of surgical strikes made it possible for them to safely do so. In the second Gulf War, the ability roll armour was made possible because of our no fly zones and air cover. But to read this article our younger adults would never know that.

You cannot win and hold ground without armour on the ground, and you cannot keep armour on the ground unless its protected from the air. Even WW2, we could not win until we had control of the skies, and we still had to have the armour advance to control the ground. Anti armour weapons have become very effective as proven in the Ukraine war and I hope our own generals are paying attention, still, you cannot control the ground without heavy armour.

Either the author of the linked article doesn't have a clue about their subject, or they are just lying about recent history. Neither are good journalism.

 

[Dekster]

Okay but Putin wouldn't be asking for 130K new draftees if his war was going swimmingly

 

[Manonthestreet]

MSN

This article pretends that missiles and jet fighters do not exist. From a very dishonest accounting of the first Gulf War, led by Powell's strategy and Schawrtzkophs (<sp?), execution of that strategy with air power, to the near total destruction of many Ukraine's cities by bombers and missiles, this article pretends that both examples war are by tanks and other armour only. Sources such as the one who supplied this article have been calling for the decimation of our defense capabilities for a very long time. You can bet the bank that this is just another step in their battle to emaciate our ability to defend ourselves. Modern warfare has been led by air power, with the armour coming in after threats have been neutralized or at least marginalized from the air. In the first Gulf war the tanks did not roll until after weeks of surgical strikes made it possible for them to safely do so. In the second Gulf War, the ability roll armour was made possible because of our no fly zones and air cover. But to read this article our younger adults would never know that.

You cannot win and hold ground without armour on the ground, and you cannot keep armour on the ground unless its protected from the air. Even WW2, we could not win until we had control of the skies, and we still had to have the armour advance to control the ground. Anti armour weapons have become very effective as proven in the Ukraine war and I hope our own generals are paying attention, still, you cannot control the ground without heavy armour.

Either the author of the linked article doesn't have a clue about their subject, or they are just lying about recent history. Neither are good journalism.

Dont know...tank might be outdated. We couldnt launch another Gulf war if we had too the way our Navy is being shrunk.

 

[rightwinger]

MSN

This article pretends that missiles and jet fighters do not exist. From a very dishonest accounting of the first Gulf War, led by Powell's strategy and Schawrtzkophs (<sp?), execution of that strategy with air power, to the near total destruction of many Ukraine's cities by bombers and missiles, this article pretends that both examples war are by tanks and other armour only. Sources such as the one who supplied this article have been calling for the decimation of our defense capabilities for a very long time. You can bet the bank that this is just another step in their battle to emaciate our ability to defend ourselves. Modern warfare has been led by air power, with the armour coming in after threats have been neutralized or at least marginalized from the air. In the first Gulf war the tanks did not roll until after weeks of surgical strikes made it possible for them to safely do so. In the second Gulf War, the ability roll armour was made possible because of our no fly zones and air cover. But to read this article our younger adults would never know that.

You cannot win and hold ground without armour on the ground, and you cannot keep armour on the ground unless its protected from the air. Even WW2, we could not win until we had control of the skies, and we still had to have the armour advance to control the ground. Anti armour weapons have become very effective as proven in the Ukraine war and I hope our own generals are paying attention, still, you cannot control the ground without heavy armour.

Either the author of the linked article doesn't have a clue about their subject, or they are just lying about recent history. Neither are good journalism.

The US has learned that it is not always controlling the airspace, bombing, taking cities and winning battles.

It is the will to win.

We won every major battle in Vietnam, bombed the shit out of them, slaughtered them but they still kept coming at us.
As long as we were there, they would keep picking us off until we grew tired of 60,000 dead with no end in sight.

Invading another country is not the same as defending your homeland. Putin will find that out when he tries to occupy Ukraine and the people don’t want him there.

Eventually, the invader gets tired of war, gets tired of endless casualties, can’t afford it anymore and just goes home.

 

[1stNickD]

Okay but Putin wouldn't be asking for 130K new draftees if his war was going swimmingly

Yes, he sent his tanks in prematurely, but he holds the areas he originally wanted so he is not losing in that sense.

His generals have not been effective and it has cost them in material and blood. Russia has its own brand of PC advancement based on who is loyal to the Putin regime. We have a new brand of PC in our military based on who is properly woke. Pay attention to this, because we now have navy ships running into each other in peacetime, and have lowered the physical tests for our recruits and special forces so 105 lb girls, and boys who want to be women, can pretend to be battle soldiers or advance into leadership rolls. If the shit really hits the fan today we are not going to even do half as well as we will need to to do.

 

[Baron Von Murderpaws]

This is part of the lefts problems........specifically the decrepit zombies of the Democratic Party.

They grew up in the age of newspapers, magazines, and the word of mouth. Things that were easily manipulated and construed. They have yet to grasp the idea that it doesn't take a week for a news story to reach the papers anymore and get distributed to the people. They have no clue what INSTANTANEOUS live news IS.

People whipping out their phones, taking live shots and videos, and then instantly putting them online for the entire world to see, does not comprehend in their shriveled up, ass backwards, corrupt and evil brains.....or whatever is up there in their dead little heads.

They still think they have the power to manipulate all media before it goes public. This is their doom. This is why they are hard core, raging fuktards. THEY are the ones that "don't get it".

 

[Dekster]

Yes, he sent his tanks in prematurely, but he holds the areas he originally wanted so he is not losing in that sense.

His generals have not been effective and it has cost them in material and blood. Russia has its own brand of PC advancement based on who is loyal to the Putin regime. We have a new brand of PC in our military based on who is properly woke. Pay attention to this, because we now have navy ships running into each other in peacetime, and have lowered the physical tests for our recruits and special forces so 105 lb girls, and boys who want to be women, can pretend to be battle soldiers or advance into leadership rolls. If the shit really hits the fan today we are not going to even do half as well as we will need to to do.

While I think the US move to gender neutral requirements is silly, only a small portion of our military are 11B's. The real difference here besides all this is the US military, for better or worse, is an experienced military while this is really Russia's first war in well over a decade. They have lost their institutional memory for real front line combat.

 

[1stNickD]

The US has learned that it is not always controlling the airspace, bombing, taking cities and winning battles.

It is the will to win.

We won every major battle in Vietnam, bombed the shit out of them, slaughtered them but they still kept coming at us.
As long as we were there, they would keep picking us off until we grew tired of 60,000 dead with no end in sight.

Invading another country is not the same as defending your homeland. Putin will find that out when he tries to occupy Ukraine and the people don’t want him there.

Eventually, the invader gets tired of war, gets tired of endless casualties, can’t afford it anymore and just goes home.

I partially agree with you. Our nations is perhaps the best in history when it comes to tactics. But we usually suck when it comes to strategy. The south Vietnamese mostly did want us there and did not want to live under the murderous communists of the north. But NV had total and constant support from nearby Russia and China. Thats why they could keep coming and coming. We had zero strategy to deal with the political side of that war or the Korean war for that matter.

Our military has been the cream of the crop, our problems are our idiotic civilian leaders who think they are fucking Napolean but couldn't win a chess match against a 12 year old. I don't think our founding fathers ever thought in their worst nightmares that Americans would elect such morons into power.

 

[rightwinger]

I partially agree with you. Our nations is perhaps the best in history when it comes to tactics. But we usually suck when it comes to strategy. The south Vietnamese mostly did want us there and did not want to live under the murderous communists of the north. But NV had total and constant support from nearby Russia and China. Thats why they could keep coming and coming. We had zero strategy to deal with the political side of that war or the Korean war for that matter.

Our military has been the cream of the crop, our problems are our idiotic civilian leaders who think they are fucking Napolean but couldn't win a chess match against a 12 year old. I don't think our founding fathers ever thought in their worst nightmares that Americans would elect such morons into power.

Payback is a bitch

Yes the Soviets and China provided N Vietnam with weapons to use against occupying US forces. It allowed them to keep up the fight.

The US and NATO will do the same for Ukraine.
Provide small arms, grenades, mines, mortars, rockets to allow them to keep up the fight against occupying Russian forces

As bad as US morale was in Vietnam, the morale of the Russian soldier in Ukraine will be much worse

 

[The Sage of Main Street]

MSN

This article pretends that missiles and jet fighters do not exist. From a very dishonest accounting of the first Gulf War, led by Powell's strategy and Schawrtzkophs (<sp?), execution of that strategy with air power, to the near total destruction of many Ukraine's cities by bombers and missiles, this article pretends that both examples war are by tanks and other armour only. Sources such as the one who supplied this article have been calling for the decimation of our defense capabilities for a very long time. You can bet the bank that this is just another step in their battle to emaciate our ability to defend ourselves. Modern warfare has been led by air power, with the armour coming in after threats have been neutralized or at least marginalized from the air. In the first Gulf war the tanks did not roll until after weeks of surgical strikes made it possible for them to safely do so. In the second Gulf War, the ability roll armour was made possible because of our no fly zones and air cover. But to read this article our younger adults would never know that.

You cannot win and hold ground without armour on the ground, and you cannot keep armour on the ground unless its protected from the air. Even WW2, we could not win until we had control of the skies, and we still had to have the armour advance to control the ground. Anti armour weapons have become very effective as proven in the Ukraine war and I hope our own generals are paying attention, still, you cannot control the ground without heavy armour.

Either the author of the linked article doesn't have a clue about their subject, or they are just lying about recent history. Neither are good journalism.

Management Stuck on Stupid. It's Been That Way in Every Sector Ever Since.

In Vietnam, there was too much emphasis on air power. We grunts were used only as bait to draw fire, then call in air strikes. Instead, we should have slogged it out on the ground, using air and artillery only as backup. Tanks weren't any good in the jungle and dirt roads.

We also needed to invade the North. All the damage the jets did to the North had no decisive effect.

Imagine Iwo Jima being months of pounding the island with bombers and naval gunfire before sending the Marines in. That's how stupid the Pentagon had gotten to be by the 1960s.

 

[RoshawnMarkwees]

I don't think our founding fathers ever thought in their worst nightmares that Americans would elect such morons into power.

We didn’t.

 

[Concerned American]

Neither are good journalism.

Good, objective, literate journalism has been dead and in the ground for at least thirty years.

 

[Mac-7]

The US has learned that it is not always controlling the airspace, bombing, taking cities and winning battles.

It is the will to win.

We won every major battle in Vietnam, bombed the shit out of them, slaughtered them but they still kept coming at us.
As long as we were there, they would keep picking us off until we grew tired of 60,000 dead with no end in sight.

Invading another country is not the same as defending your homeland. Putin will find that out when he tries to occupy Ukraine and the people don’t want him there.

Eventually, the invader gets tired of war, gets tired of endless casualties, can’t afford it anymore and just goes home.

The US did not invade South Vietnam

we assisted them in resisting communist aggression

but it is true that the northern soldiers were highly motivated

 

[rightwinger]

The US did not invade South Vietnam

we assisted them in resisting communist aggression

but it is true that the northern soldiers were highly motivated

The US interfered in a Civil War

 

[Mac-7]

The US interfered in a Civil War

Because of the Domino Theory

besides the south had every right to live free of communism

 

[1stNickD]

Management Stuck on Stupid. It's Been That Way in Every Sector Ever Since.

In Vietnam, there was too much emphasis on air power. We grunts were used only as bait to draw fire, then call in air strikes. Instead, we should have slogged it out on the ground, using air and artillery only as backup. Tanks weren't any good in the jungle and dirt roads.

We also needed to invade the North. All the damage the jets did to the North had no decisive effect.

Imagine Iwo Jima being months of pounding the island with bombers and naval gunfire before sending the Marines in. That's how stupid the Pentagon had gotten to be by the 1960s.

Thank you for your service and your sacrifices. A close friend friend was a tunnel rat in that shit hole and he struggled with it badly until he finally drank himself to death. He only talked about it a few times and when he came home he never slept in the dark. This country was not nice to vets like him, even a lot of the other vets wouldn't give him the time of day until after he died, then they all got together and pretended to give a shit.

 

[The Sage of Main Street]

Because of the Domino Theory

besides the south had every right to live free of communism

The Boat People Were Chickenhawks

The South Vietnamese were crooks, cowards, incompetents, and collaborators. We should have bypassed them and gone directly towards Hanoi. Communism is centrally controlled; kill off their leaders and their armies would collapse like a puppet whose strings have been cut.

 

[Lastamender]

Payback is a bitch

Yes the Soviets and China provided N Vietnam with weapons to use against occupying US forces. It allowed them to keep up the fight.

The US and NATO will do the same for Ukraine.
Provide small arms, grenades, mines, mortars, rockets to allow them to keep up the fight against occupying Russian forces

As bad as US morale was in Vietnam, the morale of the Russian soldier in Ukraine will be much worse

How many Russian soldiers do you know?

 

[B. Kidd]

I partially agree with you. Our nations is perhaps the best in history when it comes to tactics. But we usually suck when it comes to strategy. The south Vietnamese mostly did want us there and did not want to live under the murderous communists of the north. But NV had total and constant support from nearby Russia and China. Thats why they could keep coming and coming. We had zero strategy to deal with the political side of that war or the Korean war for that matter.

Our military has been the cream of the crop, our problems are our idiotic civilian leaders who think they are fucking Napolean but couldn't win a chess match against a 12 year old. I don't think our founding fathers ever thought in their worst nightmares that Americans would elect such morons into power.

The same founding father's that warned us against foreign entanglements that our idiot leader's ignored??

 

[Lesh]

Every war is a class room for military professionals

Many lessons were learned in the Arab Israeli wars of the 60s and 70s and armed forces adjusted.

This one is an eye opener.

Armored forces are proving to be very vulnerable (as was suspected). Air power is also showing itself o be vulnerable as well with Stingers taking out helicopters and "slow movers" at alarming rates nd SAMs are taking out even the fastest jets.

Conventional war is going to be much different in the future