Has the M.O. on how to defeat the US military in war become this?:?

Question

Fight a fanatical guerrilla war of attrition for at most, a decade, (against a US military who has to follow "rules of engagement") or until the majority Americans get sick of it, then they scream to bring the troops home & the war is over, US loses by default. Is that how US wars are going to go from now on?

Answer 1

It's not defeating the US military.

It's just preventing the US military from defeating them.

The result is a draw, not a loss.

Aside from US lives wasted in a foolish attempt to accomplish nothing, what has the US actually lost?

We've lost no territory of our own. The insurgents haven't taken over and toppled our government. And the only reason we've lost US lives is because the US won't stop trying to occupy a country that's in the middle of a civil war.

What has the US lost, other than not getting their way?

Answer 2

The way for any country to defeat any country that invades it when the military power of the invader outweighs that of the defender is to stand your army down, break it up into militias, guerilla outfits and small cells who are armed and instructed to carry out attacks at will and when the opportunity arises. The rules of engagement have nothing to with it. The simple fact is that the US army is not trained to fight an urban war in a foreign country where they can't and never will fully have the support of the people.

Look at Vietnam - the US hardly followed the rules of engagement there and simply tried to napalm the whole place and still failed.

The IRA fought a guerilla war against the British, and while the British army improved in terms of urban warfare they never had the full support of the people in the North and that is why they couldn't win. They too broke the rules of engagement several times and still the IRA fought on.

Breaking the rules of engagement turns the population even more against you. The US have hardly followed rules of engagement in iraq with so many civilians already dead at the hands of trigger happy marines.

Answer 3

NO. the yank heroes in the conflict of Independence fought in lots an identical way against the then great ability Britain. Boy Tony you're fairly a basket case. Your attendants ought to eliminate your laptop privileges. SirCharlez -- you already know, sir, that your heroes of the conflict of Independence fought in lots an identical way. Are they considered terrorists? Viginti_Tres -- enable's look extra desirable lower back in history whilst the British have been having issues in the middle East by using fact their oil agency, British Petroleum, does not pay any royalties on the oil they have been taking. The British could no longer verify this rely of their favour so they asked the CIA to help with their difficulty. CIA reported confident and the two counties ran roughshod over the international locations of the middle East. The scars are nonetheless there and the middle East keep in mind. the end result resulted in the oil agency B/A ( British American Oil) of course different issues have been occurring with rip off western oil companies. Viginti_Tres -- at the beginning you're *$^@ racist.

Answer 4

No. There will always be terrorists. There were guys blowing up "wagon bombs" on Wall Street back at the end of the 19th century. This is nothing new in spite of the uneducated rhetoric surrounding terrorism.

The reality is that as long as we engage in international politics we will use force to achieve our goals.

To make a simple comparison Judges in the United States do not enforce their idea of how a court should be run with a gun directly, they have officers with firearms available when necessary. Judges enforce the "rules" in their courts under threat of arms.

In the same way the President of the United States has to make simple judgments about how their idea of a world should be run and indiectly enforce those "rules" under threat of arms.

Just like Judges in court Presidents have to use those arms against people who are testing the boundaries and tolerance of the "court" or nation.

To make it really simple, if we tolerate a lot of crap, we get a lot more crap. If we refuse to tolerate crap, we get a lot less crap.

Answer 5

unfortunately the answer may be yes. We need Leaders, maybe of the generation that won the last war we won. or that studies that example. We got soft and now we have no leaders with the stones to really turn the dogs loose. Our soldiers can do it Our Generals are up to it (some anyway)
the politicians are not worth a damn and that's is the problem.
We forfeited Vietnam and Korea and unless we let the Army FIGHT we will forfeit this one also. I call your attention the the Savage doctrine and the Powell doctrine We need Leaders who will put the winning strategies to work. we are fighting roaches with a fly swater but we have a can of raid in our pocket!

Answer 6

No they have understood that at minimal cost (compared to the 1000 billion of the war), they can seriously weaken the US (financially). As a result, the US owes more money to foreign power.

It also impacts the moral of US citizens while the real effect in casualties is still minor

It affects the economy and the US industry by wasting resources that could have been invested in the future (education, research, industry, medicine, environment)

It weakens the US on the international diplomatic level


So yes, they are successful and they know armors can´t stop them. It´s a gun against a dangerous ideology... so the response is of course wrong and their feeling of martyrdom is exactly what they wanted to create. And the US ran right ahead for it.

Answer 7

Penstrex, unless you were there I'm not interested in hearing your garbage about the military not following the rules of engagement in Vietnam. I lost several fellow pilots because we DID follow the ROEs. Tell what you KNOW or shut up.

Answer 8

very much could turn out that way you cant win the war with your hands tied . i wish there bucking mothers and sons were on the front line everytime we lose an american life because of rules of mr nice guy.im a vet and i will get very upset when i think of the way they kill us yes kill us . if they dont buy it in afratastand or where ever they will under the covers destroy them when they get home. as soon as americas none to forget the vets does there nails the vets will discover who turns out to be god forbid the real enemy. they will hit brick walls when it comes to medical compensation etc. the poison is still out there desertion is very possible when it comes to our backbone of the country .are you hearing me america.

Answer 9

Thats what the Liberals are hoping for. They suceeded in the Vietnam war and they are trying hard with the Iraqi war. The only mistake the current admisitration has made is to try to appease these gutless cowards and attemt to fight a kinder gentler war.

Answer 10

As usual the left is the cause of our failures. They encourage the young and minorities to fail so they will inevitably depend on them for their welfare. I cant understand why others can't see this. It's called preserving the power through attrition.