Why is war planning so poorly done?

Question

I can't figure out why the American, British, Canadian, etc...militaries enter into other countries but do not lock down the boarders of that country. It would seem to me if you locked down the country, then the enemy could not bring in weapons, and supplies to make bombs. Lock down. Kill who needs to be killed. Help rebuild. Leave. Am I missing something?

Answer 1

Yeah you are missing something. In modern time in the US, wars aren't fought by generals, they are fought by politicians. To bring in enough troops to properly do the job would not be politically expedient. The opposing party, in this case the democrats would have a field day with the money it would cost to do the job right.

Instead, GWB and Rumsfeld tried to do the job with too few troops and failed. They failed to lock down the borders, they failed to guard large caches of captured arms and ammunition, they failed to stop insurgents from entering the country although generals thought otherwise. They decided to run the war their way and ignored the generals, just like Hitler did, I sure hope we corrected these mistakes on time and don't see the same dismal end to this war that Hitler did with his.

Answer 2

Of course you have never been in Military, by your question. Anytime you go to different Countries, you are outnumbered as far as man power. Do you know how many Ground Troops(Infantry) to secure borders? It is not a GAME Of RISK. You deal with civilians, work with or against you mostly the latter.Not only do the military of whatever country you attacking are armed, so are the civilians. People do let themselves get killed.
Let say a Country attacked USA, and USA did not have a Military or Police. Any country will have a hard time, because of civilians population will take up arms. USA Citizens have access to arms, and have Veterans in population. They know the terrian.
It is not easy to win a war, taking out Leadership is alot easier from military standpoint than Securing the Country and replacing a Government is whole different animal.

Answer 3

i think that the information that became provided to the Senate became incorrect. in the very incontrovertible fact that WMD's have been on no account modern in Iraq after the invasion. besides the very incontrovertible fact that it relatively is actual that Saddam Hussein became uncontrolled and mandatory to be dealt with. The information that have been given by making use of the administration have been fabricated. Why have been those products on no account uncovered? How became this so suggested as intelligence being gathered? it relatively is ordinary adequate to blame Hillary on the grounds that there is an upcoming presidential election on the horizon. there have been a good number of different Senators that made their selection to invade Iraq based on the comparable information that became offered to her, the two conservative and liberal. Why is it which you sense the would desire to direct this at Hillary, and not the senate as an entire?

Answer 4

first of all, the military doesn't actually run wars. you have to contend with politicians, arm chair generals (who have never fired a shot, or been fired on but are still experts on warfare) and public opinion. then the lawyers go into a war zone and "investigate" to determine if all the killing was legal. eventually when the vets come home, the "educated" populace will call them baby killers and in extreme moments, physically attack them, to prove that "peace" and "non violence" is the only way.

Answer 5

We have 2.000 miles of southern border that we cannot secure from unarmed immigrants seeking work. What about jihadists hell bent to get in and cause trouble, who know the territory?

The current debacle is largely owing to the wrong people in office - they wanted our military to do things on the cheap and overestimated what it takes to do the job. The military never wanted to go in, and if they did, they didn't want to go in the way they were sent. Rummy and Bush did not listen to the experts.

Answer 6

Politics. We use to fight wars to protect US from THEM coming over here and attacking US (not U.S. - US; people in the United States).

Now we go to wars because they have something we want. Such as OIL. If Haiti had oil, we would attack it tomorrow and get rid of their leadership. So we plan poorly, leave quickly, and the country that is NO THREAT TO ANYONE, goes into chaos, then rebuilds, and life goes on.

It really FLOORS me to hear people say that we are in Iraq fighting for our freedom. Excuse me? The Bahamas is a greater threat to us.

And Afganistan. The heroin and cocane farmers are back in business. 80% of these drugs come to the US from Afganistan. But you do not see us going back to stop the drug farms. Because Afganistan has NO OIL.

Answer 7

Ok number one, Bush didn't plan much at all. Liberals don't understand the fact that the goverment is made up of 1,000's of people!

If you think it's poorly planned, why don't you come up with a better plan? Liberals always complain but never have a solution. hmmm...

Answer 8

You are. Get a woman to do it. History has proven that women are among the evilest of creatures. Turn us loose and there will be no more problems.

Answer 9

Because the ones who start and plan the wars are not the ones fighting and risking their lives.it doesn't matter to them, just moving the chess pieces

Answer 10

Bush.