Sebastian J. Bae, War On the Rocks: How America was Seduced by the "Easy War"
As the premier military power since the Cold War, the United States, like hegemonic powers of the past, is held captive by the dangerous myth of the “easy war.” While terms like “network-centric warfare” wouldn’t formally enter the U.S. defense establishment lexicon until later in the 1990s, the central notion on which such concepts are based — that precision technology could be leveraged to quickly overpower an adversary — were validated by the stunning U.S. success in the First Gulf War. In a matter of 100 hours, with overwhelming and coordinated force and relying heavily on airstrikes, the largely painless dispatching of Saddam Hussein’s forces, the world’s fifth largest army, served as an affirmation to many of the invincibility of American military might. Compared to the bitter losses in Korea and Vietnam, the First Gulf War established an unequivocal military victory, reaffirming the value and dominance of the American methodology of warfare. Or at least that’s how the story is told.
As a result, the First Gulf War entrenched the notion that technology would provide near-omniscience on the battlefield, paving the road to an uncomplicated victory. Almost overnight, in the minds of strategists and policymakers, wars had become brief, casual affairs.
Read more ....
WNU Editor: I know that those who have served in the military do not believe in the idea that "war is easy". But for those who have not .... which is most Americans .... this idea that a conflict can be easily resolved has always been perplexing to me. Is this the fault of the culture, media, politicians, academia .... I do not know the answer to that. But the U.S. is not alone. Other countries also have a perception that they can fight an "easy war". China sticks in my mind .... their culture has made the belief that a war can be fought successfully and without much bloodshed a common thread .... and when I hear my Chinese friends and associates talk about why Beijing should use force to enforce its territorial claims ..... I get the shivers. But everything is not hopeless. In Russia among my family and friends .... everyone that I know dreads the idea of becoming involved in a war .... regardless of the size and scope of the conflict. I can also say the same for most of Europe .... there is no appetite for war .... all the more remarkable because Europe is a continent that has known widespread war and conflict for thousands of years.
16 comments:
Technology is only a part; it's the hours spent training that count. But training isn't 'sexy'. It isn't physically tangible and it's not an easy political target.
It also doesn't bring jobs and money to the politicians' districts.
"Is this the fault of the culture, media, politicians, academia" I think it is not the fault but the goal so as to be able to entice America's youth to fight for causes that have no real relevance to them. As for Europe and other war torn regions they have had their share and witnessed in many cases first hand the death and destruction. It is easy to think war is easy for someone has only witnessed it in movies.
I retired from a lifetime career in banking. Those common folk who come from historically war torn countries tend to by gold wafers whenever they can.
During the Iran/US embassy issue a customer of mine, who had flown bombers in WWII, came back from a visit to the States. He was amazed that so soon after the Vietnam fiasco young Americans were lining up at recruitment centres hoping for a war in Iran.
American will come to know how bloody the war will be when they confront with a capable nation
America came up against capable military powers in Korea and Vietnam.
Both the USSR and China provided significant support.
North Vietnam was able to send virtually its entire army south because the Chinese army garrisoned the north. I know this to be true.
People undergoing training have to be paid. They then turnaround and spend their pay on food housing and everything else.
Unlike a welfare recipient you generally have person, who is capable of performing task that people and the country in general want.
But those people who worked for their pay can't be made into a voting mob à la Roman politics or current day Democrat Party politics.
Nothing says Democracy quite like the gangs of Chicago getting out the vote in their ward.
American will come to know how bloody the war will be when they confront with a capable nation
Actually, at the time of the First Gulf war, the US was trained (and equipped) to confront a "capable nation." Too bad that's (willfully or otherwise) forgotten.
I have been saying this for 25 years. In a way, the worst thing to happen was the ease of the 1st Gulf War. The military cut trigger pullers thinking airpower alone could win wars. I said no one would fight us in the open in the next war. It was so bad the Army had to recruit from other services to get guys on the ground in Iraq. The decade of he 90's while an armor officer I always ask everyone "who is gonna plant the flag?"
"I think it is not the fault but the goal so as to be able to entice America's youth to fight for causes that have no real relevance to them."
-bob huntley
if freedom is not relevant, then what the hell is?
its always entertaining, as a current service member, hearing an american speaking like this of his own and its very indicative of a sheepish and generally pathetic character overall.
an american that can say this in the face of all our fallen brethren past/present/future and their families should be (in a perfect world) rushed to the front and given a rifle to make amends and, if he's lucky, prove his worth as a human. fortunately for bob, the freedom he has lavished in all these years as a banker has allowed him to make any ignorant comment he so desires, even if it is at the expense of those that have paid for his freedom with their lives.
there are many sheep with opinions (99% of americans), some even denying the wolves existence while they lay drifting off into sleep in their safe warm cozy little beds, unaware of the violence being done on their behalf, for their own safety and well being, in protection of freedom as it has existed in america (which is unlike any other time period in history).
"American will come to know how bloody the war will be when they confront with a capable nation"
other than this statement being one that denies basic historical fact to that of the last 240 years of american military operation, its good to know that at least some still seek death via 5.56 NATO.
War is always easy for those who don't have to fight it, have a loved one in it, or have it happen in their neighbourhood\vicinity. For "people" in North America, war is something that happens "over there". For the most part, they do not concern themselves overly with the causes, reasons, or motivations behind it. When it's discussed, it's generally on an absurd or infantile level and expressed in terms like "just nuke 'em", "carpet bomb 'em" or some such off hand thing.
Aizino mentioned once how luck Canadians are living in a culdesac under an umbrella. He's right, to a point. The luck of geography holds true for North America in general, but what holds truer still is the ruthless application of force that established and maintains said stability. It's a vicious circle however, because sooner or later through external forces, internal contradictions or a combination of both, war will come here.
It won't be so easy then.
https://aeon.co/essays/why-americans-believe-the-us-can-win-wars
http://foreignpolicy.com/2011/04/04/is-america-addicted-to-war/
http://www.bloombergview.com/articles/2014-09-30/do-americans-love-war
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/War_Is_a_Force_That_Gives_Us_Meaning
Canada has not faced the "real" consequences since the War of 1812, ( arguably the Fenian Raids and the Reil Rebellion),
The US has not faced the "real" consequences of war since the Civil War.
"We" have for a long time, have fought "our" wars "over there" where the full consequences of war falls on "them", not us.
"The US has not faced the "real" consequences of war since the Civil War."
this is false.
had the US not joined the fight in WWII and WWI there would have been numerous lasting negative consequences worldwide, to put it lightly...
I say we let the Canadians handle it. They have overwhelming moral superiority.
China lost 3,750,000 soldiers during WWII, 8,191,000 civillians to war, and 19,750,000 to war induced famine and disease.
The Soviet Union lost 10,922,000 soldiers during WWII, 9,584,000 civillians to war and 8,600,000 to war induced famin and disease.
Germany lost 5,318,000 soldiers during WWII, 2,400,000 civillians to war, and 700,000 to was induced famine and disease.
The US lost 407,200 soldiers to WWII, and suffered a total of 12,800 civillian casualties.
0 US cities were destroyed, 0 US industries were destroyed, 0 US Infrastructure was destroyed and 0 acres of US farmland was contaminated with landmines or UXO.
The photo's of the destruction of Ramadi or Homs, could apply to any of the European cities in Europe in the combat zones, ( except Paris), and London, Coventry or Manchester during the Blitz,
But cannot be applied to any US city, since the late stages of the Civil War, and then, only the "seige" cities like Alexandria.
That would be nice for a change,
But how are you going to end your combat deployments in 103 nations with out a "stabbed in the back" myth, accusations of being "cheeze like product eating surrender monkeys", and how are you going to make 19 of the 20 Presidential Cantidates , 522 Congressmen, 421 Representatives and 8789 MSM Pundits to shut up about "more War" and stop singing "bomb, bomb, bomb, ( insert the name of your preferred country here)" ?
That would be an interesting discussion.
HurHur thank you very much for the compliment. I am a Canadian not an American and unlike many, many Americans during my working life, I did not travel to other countries to kill innocents on behalf of the wealthy people of my country. Many of those brave Americans that did, went to undeclared wars started by subversive activities of the CIA and others and died, not to protect America and Freedom but for misguided patriotism that is proffered in America. It is no wonder so many returning Veterans from Vietnam have committed suicide, most likely out of guilt. There can be no honour in killing innocents whether it is face to face or from the a comfortable chair three thousand miles away. If you fought on a front line in Vietnam, Iraq or Afghanistan, no matter how much you try to convince yourself it was to protect America and freedom, it wasn't
Post a Comment