we all know The USA has the worlds greatest army but does our lack of success in war show that their is no?

Question

such thing as a super power? we won world war 2 but nothing big since the cold war was obviously more of a stand off then a war.
if the worlds greatest army cant beat tribesmen in afghanistan or peasants in vietnam does it more or less mean war just isnt the solution? and if not what is

Answer 1

Oh dear, here we go again.

1. The USA did not 'win' the Second World War.
2. The USA was a relatively small part of a massive coalition, the majority of the burden of which was carried by the people and armed forces of the ex-Soviet Union.
3. This constant trumpeting of the phrase 'Super-Power' seems to be going to your heads, as does the expression 'world's greatest army'. They are just empty words. Lacking in any meaning.
4. The Cold War wasn't 'won', the Soviet Union collapsed under it's own weight. The only worthwhile part that the US played in that is that the very same 'Military Industrial Complex' you know, the one that President Ike Eisenhower ( remember him, Supreme Allied Commander in Europe from D-day on ( Western Front Forces ) warned us against in his farewell address, that MIC played the defence budget game to such degree that they literally spent the Soviets into a standstill. Phyrric victory ?

So finally, I sense that your question is a subtle back-hand, and yes, you are spot on, war isn't the way. It never was, and it never will be.

Construction is the way, not destruction.

Answer 2

You really have no idea of history or anything abut the 2nd war. Britain had with the help of the Russians brought Germany to its knees and the only thing your great army did was to make up numbers for the final push. the Germans were out of Africa before you joined after sitting on the fence for 4 years charging extortionate rates for the smallest thing and bankrupting us. I am not suprised that your army is bogged down with tribesmen and peasants as they never managed either Korea or Vietnam either. It is about time that your polotocians took their noses out of other persons business although as long as oil is involved that will not happen. If you were so concerned about dictators then you would be in Zimbabwe.

Answer 3

There really is no such thing as a "superpower" and as an American I hate that word. We live in a time when there is no incentive to have a great military because there is so much sensitivity and political correctness. Most of this is for the better but some is for the worse of course.

Generally speaking in today's world the best thing is to have a good life and a good image- where you are admired or respected by others. By "you" I mean you as in you the individual, not you plural like y'all where I'm from in implying a group or nation. (Your nation can only give you a good image to a certain degree.) In a way the media and economy are more or less the King and Church from a previous age. Things like education are merely tools. If one nation has a better education but the other has a better economy then the one with the better economy is usually doing something better somehow- however happiness is more important than this. If one nation is somewhat less productive because the citizens work less but prefer it then it might be a good trade off but I'm just saying that unless education is used to produce a good economy or happiness in some other way it's useless. Image is dire because we live in a global world and need others to have a good opinion on our citizens. Any nation that can provide for it's citizens the best way of life for themselves and best image/respect amongst outsiders is the superior nation. You only need a military in case of attack because it won't bring respect nowadays. (Not that I'm saying it should.) The whole thing with admiration via the military like Alexander the Great and Napoleon probably had is now extinct except in certain backward places. Most people admire those that help people and do good in the world.

P.S. He doesn't say who won WWII, just "we" and we could mean allied powers

Answer 4

Can I just point out that the army who made the key contribution to winning world war 2 was the Red Army. If it hadn't been for the Russian victory at Stalingrad and their subsequent advances into Eastern Europe, D Day would not have been possible and the outcome of the war might have been very different. Also, we must never forget that these advances occurred despite the appalling manner in which the Russian troops were treated by their own officers and political authorities.

The recent lack of US success in war simply shows that the US army is certainly not the "world's greatest army". If you truly believe it is, then your arrogance is even greater than your ignorance.

Answer 5

The United States has been the biggest creator of problems in the Middle east as well as other parts of the World for over the last 50 or so years.

Don't forget the CIA put the Shah of Iran into power illegally in 1953 as well as helping to put Saddam Hussein into power in Iraq in the late 1960's. As well as the good old Reagan government sold weapons to the Iraqi's in the 1980's to fight against Iran.

As well as there has been a lot CIA involvement in Central and South America. The CIA and the American Government have seen fit to put who they want in power and then remove them later when they no longer serve their needs.

The United States has lost respect in the world more so in the last six years due to the war mongering and lies of the Bush Administration especially by VP Cheney, Karl Rove, and the rest of the PNAC chickenhaws including President Bush's brother Jeb Bush one of the signing members of the PNAC.

The world needs peace in the future and not wars that are started based on lies which the Iraq War is all about. It is about time that all the lies are coming out about the Bush Administration with the firing of the state attorneys by Alberto Gonzales to the Scooter Libby trial.

There will be more lies exposed about the Bush Administration as time goes on and may they be tried by the World Courts in the Hague for crimes against humanity.

Answer 6

The reality is that the US Army has no peer in the traditional set piece battle. The NVA were not able to stand toe to toe with American forces and neither are the Iraqis. In fact, the US Army is one of the best trained and equipped in the world.

Of course, any army can be laid low by partisan tactics. We have seen this since the time of Spartacus. We ourselves sent a very fine British Army running pell mell back to Boston as we sniped them from all sides of the road back from Lexington and Concord. Tito fought the Germans to a standstill in Yugoslavia. The Warsaw Uprising of 1944 took some of Germany's best (Hermann Goering Division) and some of its cruelest (Dirlewanger's Brigade) before it was defeated.

The current mission facing our troops is police work plain and simple. It is not the mission for which they are trained and thank goodness. Our nation has always maintained that soldiers never - ever become policeman. You want democracy to end....make policemen of your soldiers.

How do we win in Iraq...??? It can be done, the Germans proved it in Warsaw. But do we have the cruelty inside us to do what has to be done?? You cannot fight this enemy with boxing gloves. You must remove the gloves and barefist beat these folks to death.

William T. Sherman always said that war must be so terrible that the South would never again look to it as a political tool. We must make war and misery so awful that Iraqis look back decades from now and shudder at the thought of US troops returning.

Do we have the collective will to either leave or actually get busy and fight a real war??

Answer 7

Worlds Greatest army? Are you having a laugh, More americans have died in the shooting ranges , shooting each other than most other countries,

They got wasted with their own weapons in Vietnam , by children and women.

I would say they had the worst army in the world.

What they do have is the ability to make themselves look good on TV .

Wars create jobs and money !!

Answer 8

Historically it has ever been so. Big Armies find it virtually impossible to defeat small groups of determined guerrilla fighters.....
The Romans in Britain could not defeat the Welsh or the Scots. They had to resort to building a bloody great wall from one side of England to the other in an effort to keep the Scots contained.

So don't feel so bad about the situation in Iraq.
Great Armies like to face other Armies in the Field of Battle.

Not being sniped at and bombed, in the back streets of Towns and Villages by men who are not even in Uniform!

Oh! and thanks for all the help in WW2. But do remember that Britain did it's bit in defeating Hitler. GBA.

Answer 9

Oh please.

For 'super power' read 'super ego' and we're more than halfway towards the answer to your question.

Perhaps a little more time spent educating yourself and a little less time spent asking factually inaccurate questions might go some way towards giving you an informed opinion that would stand up in an intellectual debate.

Answer 10

depends on your objectives in war? i.e was Afghanistan really about re-building a failed state? or was it about satisfying a public need for revenge for 9/11 and securing one of the most valuable pipelines in the world?

and Iraq, really about WMD's i doubt it, the first things they secured was all the oil, and it still flows freely today.

finally in a streight battle the US would be the clear winner against anybody, but the problem lies in guerrilla warfare, there is just no way of defeating it unless you win the hearts and mind of the people. Which is one area the US will never win in any war