Re: OT - Democrats and Waterboarding -- The party will lose the presidential race if it defines itself as soft on terror
- From: F. George McDuffee <gmcduffee@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Wed, 07 Nov 2007 12:17:00 -0600
On Wed, 07 Nov 2007 09:59:31 -0600, Ignoramus26797
<ignoramus26797@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
My plan would be to not invade Iraq, and send at least two more=============
divisions to Iraq and Pakistan to find Bin Laden.
I think you meant Iran in the first line, not Iraq.
A major problem is that the US has no more ground forces
available. The ground forces are so stretched that individual
battalions and even companies are now assigned by the highest
echelons, with regimental and division deployments a rapidly
fading memory.
To be sure the US could deploy some of its existing air and navel
forces as ground troops, but these are not suitably equipped or
trained for this role, and this would preclude their rapid
employment in their original roles, which may well be urgently
required, for example to keep the Strait of Hormuz open and/or
preclude a PRC "invasion" of Taiwan, without resorting to nuclear
weapons.
Even if the draft were reinstituted, and an "explosion" rather
than expansion of the ground forces occurred, the training cadre
is engaged in combat operations and the equipment does not exist,
with the result that poorly trained and marginally equipped
forces would be deployed (which unfortunately has been the case
in all the wars the US has ever fought).
What is unique this time is that the domestic industrial
infrastructure to domestically produce the required war material,
including even uniforms and boots no longer exists. Arms and
ammunition/munitions for the existing forces/level of operations
are marginal at best, and any expansion of operations, planed or
unexpected, is likely to have disastrous consequences, as the war
emergency stockpiles have been depleted to a large extent.
Even if the M-1s and M-14s are still operational and are issued,
the ammunition does not exist, and when the battle gets to the
level of the bayonet and/or K-bar, while I am sure the US troops
will give a good account of themselves, the gross numerical
dis-advantage will be decisive in the end.
Any major expansion, and 2 more divisions would be a major
expansion in this context, is more or less impossible unless you
want to see our men and women training with wooden rifles.
What no one in management, either corporate or government, ever
seems to learn is that it *ALWAYS* takes longer and *ALWAYS*
costs more than what you planned for, no matter with it is.
Peter Townsand in his leadership book "Up The Organization"
listed a number of management axioms. In this contest the most
important was "A professional is someone who always knows when to
quit."
http://www.amazon.com/Up-Organization-Robert-Townsend/dp/0449205053
http://www.leadershipnow.com/leadershop/9780787987756.html
The only question, with the soaring oil prices, the plunging
dollar, and the US internal credit implosion, appears to be
whether the US response will be proactive or reactive, with
reactive being *MUCH* more expensive and unpalatable.
For example, what are the US contingency plans for extracting our
people if Turkey cuts our lines of communications, and can these
"plans" be implemented in the middle of an oil and financial
crisis, or are these simply more pipe dreams? No logistics
means no fuel for the aircraft and no air ordinance which is our
"ace in the hole."
If we think the US has problems now, consider what these will be
with horrendous mid-east casualties, and huge numbers of US
troops/personell held as POWs, without the benefit of the Geneva
Convention.
O. P. Smith and "Chesty" Puller was able to extract their Marine
units and other troops in Korea, but this was with elite troops,
exceptional leadership, minimal rear-echelon units/equipment and
air superiority / exceptional close air support.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Battle_of_Chosin_Reservoir
It should also be noted that there is no "safe" evacuation port
available to retreat to, and the Iranians are known to possess
large numbers of the "silkworm" anti-shipping missiles.
It is also likely that some of the US major oil suppliers such as
Mexico and Venezuela will take this opportunity to "gouge" on oil
prices and quite likely embargo any exports to the US, diverting
all their exports to Europe, Japan and China who will be able to
pay in hard currencies such as the Yen and Euro.
When all is said and done, the old folk wisdom "when you play
with fire, you will get burned" still appears operational.
Indeed, this should be expanded to "If you let your kids play
with matches, sooner or later they will burn the house down."
Unka' George [George McDuffee]
============
Merchants have no country.
The mere spot they stand on
does not constitute so strong an attachment
as that from which they draw their gains.
Thomas Jefferson (1743-1826),
U.S. president. Letter, 17 March 1814.
.
- Follow-Ups:
- Re: OT - Democrats and Waterboarding -- The party will lose the presidential race if it defines itself as soft on terror
- From: Rex
- Re: OT - Democrats and Waterboarding -- The party will lose the presidential race if it defines itself as soft on terror
- From: Too_Many_Tools
- Re: OT - Democrats and Waterboarding -- The party will lose the presidential race if it defines itself as soft on terror
- From: Too_Many_Tools
- Re: OT - Democrats and Waterboarding -- The party will lose the presidential race if it defines itself as soft on terror
- From: Ignoramus26797
- Re: OT - Democrats and Waterboarding -- The party will lose the presidential race if it defines itself as soft on terror
- References:
- OT - Democrats and Waterboarding -- The party will lose the presidential race if it defines itself as soft on terror
- From: Joseph Gwinn
- Re: OT - Democrats and Waterboarding -- The party will lose the presidential race if it defines itself as soft on terror
- From: Ignoramus26797
- Re: OT - Democrats and Waterboarding -- The party will lose the presidential race if it defines itself as soft on terror
- From: Ignoramus26797
- OT - Democrats and Waterboarding -- The party will lose the presidential race if it defines itself as soft on terror
- Prev by Date: Re: Unions
- Next by Date: Re: Unions
- Previous by thread: Re: OT - Democrats and Waterboarding -- The party will lose the presidential race if it defines itself as soft on terror
- Next by thread: Re: OT - Democrats and Waterboarding -- The party will lose the presidential race if it defines itself as soft on terror
- Index(es):
Relevant Pages
|
Loading