Replies

He is however, more qualified than any of us to pontificate from the perspective of the guy on the ground.

If you read Hackworth's articles prior to Desert Storm, you will find that he predicted a World War One style bloodbath on the ground for U.S. forces.

The man could simply not think beyond the way war used to be in World War II, the Korean War and Vietnam. He truly believed that Desert Storm was going to be a replay of the World War One style combat seen in the Iran-Iraq War.

In addition, Hackworth is still fighting the Billy Mitchell vs Infantry arguments of the 1920's and 1930's that went out the window when the Germans introduced the LAND-AIR Battle Doctrine to the world in 1939. To quote the Air Force Association editorial linked below, "As almost everyone except Colonel Hackworth seems to realize, modern warfare is a combined-arms proposition."

Shooting Blind: David Hackworth is a distinguished soldier, but his arguments about airpower are old, tired, and wrong.

Hackworth is a highly decorated infantryman and he deserves our respect for that.

However, being an Audie Murphy does not automatically give you the strategic wisdom to be a theater commander and Hackworth's prior predictions have shown him to be rather clueless when it comes to the Big Picture.

I agree.... Hack is stuggling to remain relevant.
It seems he is owed one more Purple Heart - for the shot he must have taken to the head...

He has been wrong for so many years - that it is dangerous to even ask his opinion...

At least some of us old farts - realize we can't refight our war.. Hack has figured that out yet.

I wish he would burn his damned black turtle neck sweaters - and stop being a pain in the ass.

Semper Fi

i believe that you will find that Hackworth was criticising WWII tactics that were used in Vietnam. For the record: Desert Storm WAS a WWII style conflict, and an anamolie (sp?) in modern warfare. So, you don't think the Air Force has an axe to grind against Hackworth? All he did was tell the truth about Desert Storm, namely that Buster Glossen promised a 50% destruction of Iraqui Republican Guards within five days, when in fact Air strikes only did 15% of them overall. Considering that Hackworth, as a combat commander in Vietnam had to coordinate airstrikes with arty, i would think he has a pretty good handle on combined arms action, in fact he has advocated for it and criticised closed-mindedness in the seperate services. i don't know what you've been reading, but it's not the same things that i have been reading. i do conceed that Hackworth is still hated by the military establishment, especially the Air Force who is likely to loose the most if there is a cut back on high priced, unneeded, expensive toys.