Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article


The graphic comes from the evil NY Times. The article appears to be true to the original, evil NY Times article. Is the Spartanburg Herald-Journal a subsidiary of the NY Times?
1 posted on 10/06/2006 10:47:31 PM PDT by neverdem
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies ]


To: neverdem

We might just as well surrender now and save all the trouble.


2 posted on 10/06/2006 10:54:06 PM PDT by Prokopton
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: neverdem

is this still a war? We dealt with situations not that different in past post-war situations, and worried about maintaining victory first, and cleaning up the mess later.


3 posted on 10/06/2006 10:57:10 PM PDT by ilgipper
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: neverdem

Well, you know we can't just indiscriminately kill like we did fighting Japan and Germany. No we are a more gentle military.

...or something.


5 posted on 10/06/2006 11:05:30 PM PDT by SFC Chromey (We are at war with Islamofascists, now ACT LIKE IT!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: Criminal Number 18F

ping


6 posted on 10/06/2006 11:05:45 PM PDT by razorback-bert (I met Bill Clinton once but he didnít really talk ó he was hitting on my wife)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: neverdem
". . .to change its entire culture as it transitions to irregular warfare . . . But the Army does not have nearly enough resources . . . to meet its global responsibilities . . . "

LOL! I disagree and opine that we're not going to lose the War on Terror and be overrun, murdered, raped and occupied. It is my opinion that we're going to win.

And the rant about our Army going solely and permanently to guerrilla urban warfare tactics is idiotic. Our military forces are far more versatile and educated than that. They adapt and learn as necessary for each given scenario.
8 posted on 10/06/2006 11:16:53 PM PDT by familyop (Essayons)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: neverdem
The best method for waging counterinsurgency warfare is to not get involved in such a war in the first place. As the article says, counterinsurgency warfare is manpower intensive, and we're not going to get the large (draftee) military of the Cold War/Soviet era back any time soon. While most of the "paradoxes" mentioned are true, they are only true if a nation is obsessed with the need to "win hearts and minds". Bottom line, if it becomes necessary to "break" a country, let someone else "fix it". If that "someone else" doesn't "fix" the country to our liking, we take them out as well. That way you maintain the initiative.
10 posted on 10/06/2006 11:18:18 PM PDT by pawdoggie
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: neverdem

Much of this doctrine seems ridiculous. But I'm not worried. American soldiers are very good at ignoring doctrine that doesn't work and replacing with something that does work.


14 posted on 10/07/2006 2:41:16 AM PDT by matt1234
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson