We have the F22 aircraft....Advanced computers....F18 planes....F16.....Latest tanks......and yet a rag tag group of people are hurting the USA day in and day out. All they have are basic weapons but they are putting the big dog hurt on the USA.
2007-08-11 04:02:45 · 12 answers · asked by Anonymous in Politics & Government ➔ Military
Having the most advanced weaponry and tactics at ones disposal is a decisive factor in wars, if they are conventional wars. However, in guerilla warfare, all these luxuries accorded the military are rendered ineffectual. I am civilian with a basic understanding of history and I know this.
I find it odd that those, in our most esteemed positions in government, who are arguably more educated than I am, don’t understand it. Of course the truth is they do understand it. Their objective is not about winning the war, but to sustain it long enough to make all those who profit of the endeavor as rich as possible. That is why we are not fighting this battle in manner that is appropriate to guerilla warfare.
Corporate interest is driving our strategy, not the standards that it takes to achieve military victory. That is why our men and the Iraqi people are suffering needlessly.
2007-08-11 04:31:37 · answer #1 · answered by Lawrence Louis 7 · 2⤊ 1⤋
Because they are not fighting conventional warfare. They are taking one or two pot-shots at soldiers and then running away. We cannot tell if they are civilians or militia while they are standing in a crowd. We cannot do anything until they instigate. So, if some soldiers are walking along the streets of Baghdad, and someone just starts shooting, how are we supposed to use our advanced weapons against them if they run away after 3 shots? Most of the time, after a quick series of shots, we don't even really know which direction they came from, so we can't do much about it.
The advanced tanks, planes, etc are great for taking out radar, SAM sites, important buildings, etc. What you see now are just small groups of one to a few militia soldiers trying to do damage to small groups of US soldiers and then running.
2007-08-11 04:10:55 · answer #2 · answered by biobuddha 2 · 5⤊ 0⤋
It has very little to do with advanced weapons, you need people on the ground, you have to fight insurgents using covert tactics and take the war to them.
Planes are a help but they are no use when you have to physically eyeball the terrain, especially in urban areas.
2007-08-11 04:50:33 · answer #3 · answered by conranger1 7 · 0⤊ 0⤋
well even the far most advanced weapon of today cannot recognize the civilian from a terrorist/guerilla.
having the advanced weapons you need the advanced targets to use your weapons effectively. when enemy has no radars you dont need the stealth aircraft.
furthermore Allied forces can not allow themselves to fight medieval style - killing civilians.
under such ROE, you only have a well prepared infantry with up to date body armor, night vision sights and UAV support to fight the kalashnikov equipped civilian-disguised guerillas. and that is not enough.
2007-08-11 04:24:24 · answer #4 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 0⤋
because the do gooders here in the us will not let the military fight the war as it has to be fought you can not let the leaders of the terriosts have a safe havan to plan their war and not worry about gettig killed and to have safe training grounds to train the terriost you dont see the news media going after the terriost beheading their prisoners both civilian as well as military but let the american troops make a mistake and the news media run it for a week as headline news and keep bringing it up longer afterwards and the dogooders want to release pows to return back to their same acts they say its inhumane to keep them locked up so they cant kill anymore americans but the dogooders wont do the fighting so we can bring the troops home
2007-08-11 04:22:32 · answer #5 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 0⤋
It's how it's being fought. And actually if you want to compare terrorist deaths versus U.S. soldier deaths. If you call a spade a spade, and count every Iraqi death as a terrorist death. Right now were winning ... 200,000+ to 3,000+. But keeping a terroristic Iraqi government up requires men on the ground to protect it. But if we had the guts to treat all of Iraq as an enemy it would be simple to win. Pull every U.S. soldier out.... Drop about 100 bunker busters per city .... 400 on Baghdad and we win.
2007-08-11 04:12:31 · answer #6 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 2⤋
that's because we have rules of engagements the insurgents don't and if we step out of the guidelines the media makes us look like the bad guy's
2007-08-11 04:13:01 · answer #7 · answered by glenn_montgomery88 3 · 2⤊ 0⤋
BWA HA HA!!!!! Militarily the US hasn't lost a single battle. The average is well over 100 enemy lives to one US life. The only difference is the terrorists don't value life so you only hear about American deaths on the news. Truth is we are slaughtering the scum like flies.
2007-08-11 04:09:12 · answer #8 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 4⤋
We could just bomb them, but then people would hate us even more and even MORE people would die.
Cheers and have a nice day.
Just because we have the means to do catastrophic harm, doesn't mean we should use it.
2007-08-11 04:14:49 · answer #9 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 2⤋
its not a new thing it happened in vietnam, somalia, and various other wars the us has fought, thats why its good to have a president that has military experience so we dont end end up in this mess
2007-08-11 04:09:08 · answer #10 · answered by Anonymous · 2⤊ 2⤋