Preparing for a Vietnam

[AggieDave 6]

Quote

they did control it from the latter part of the 1800s.

No...they *tried* to control it, never did they ever have it firmly in their grasp.

--"When I die, may I be surrounded by scattered chrome and burning gasoline."

[skycop 0]

I'm a little into my cups, and chomping at the bit say;

I think that every single 'Heartland American', man and women who voted for the 'Cheny/Rumsfeld' ticket should march right down to their local National Guard and pull their gear and weapons and embark for their chosen theater of engagement in earnest support of their profered enlightened idealology.

God speed.

Quote

Many of us already have, and will continue to do so. Us "Heartland Americans" understand many have done it before us, many will do it after us. Regardless of idealology.

"Just 'cause I'm simple, don't mean I'm stewpid!"

• Quote

[downwardspiral 0]

Quote

Additionally, the Department again met enlisted recruiting and accession goals in FY 2003, and continues to attract America’s finest young men and women to national service. The Navy achieved recruiting goals for a fifth consecutive year and in December 2003 completed the 29th consecutive month of attaining national mission goals for accessions and new contracts. The Marine Corps met its eighth year of meeting monthly and annual enlisted recruiting goals and its thirteenth year of success in officer recruiting. Both Services are well positioned for success in meeting FY 2004 officer accession requirements. The Marine Corps Reserve achieved its FY 2003 recruiting goals, assessing 6,174 Non-Prior Service Marines and 2,663 Prior Service Marines. Navy Recruiting was also successful in Naval Reserve recruiting by exceeding the enlisted goal of 12,000 recruits for FY 2003. In regards to quality of recruits, the Marine Corps recruited over 100 percent of its goal with over 97 percent Tier I High School graduates. During the year, the Navy implemented a policy requiring 94 percent of new recruits be high school diploma graduates (HSDG), and Navy recruiters succeeded by recruiting 94.3 percent HSDG. Navy Recruiting continued to seek the best and brightest young men and women by requiring that 62 percent of recruits score above 50 on the AFQT; Navy recruiters excelled with a rate of 65.7 percent. Navy recruiting also sought to increase the number of recruits with college experience in FY 2003, recruiting more than 3,200 applicants with at least 12 semester hours of college.

Secretary of the Navy's annual report (2004)
http://www.defenselink.mil/execsec/adr2004/pdf_files/0007_navy.pdf

Quote

Recruiting And Retaining A High-Quality Volunteer Force All of our Soldiers are warriors whose actions have strategic impact. As we are at war and will be for the foreseeable future, we must recruit men and women, who already have the warrior ethos ingrained in their character; who seek to serve our Nation; and who will have the endurance and commitment to stay the course of the conflict. They must be confident, adaptive and competent to handle the full complexity of 21st-century warfare. One-hundred percent of the Soldiers we enlist will be high school graduates (diploma or equivalent, with no less than 90 percent holding high school diplomas). The active Army, National Guard and Army Reserve recruiting goals for FY 2005 are: - Active Army — 79,000 enlistees. - Army Reserve — 18,175 non-prior service; 5,000 prior service; 5,000 prior service transition from Active Component to Reserve Component; and 9,500 prior-service transfer from Individual Ready Reserve to Troop Program Unit. - Army National Guard — 40,950 non-prior service and 22,050 prior service. Active Army retention goals for FY 2005 are: 19,670 initial career; 23,595 mid-career; and 12,016 career soldiers. The National Guard and Army Reserve will not set their FY 2005 retention goals until 30 September 2004, when each will be able to determine its eligible population.

Secretary of the Army's annual report (2005)
http://www.defenselink.mil/execsec/adr2004/pdf_files/0006_army.pdf

The Secretary of the Air Force doesn't say much about recruitment. Either that or I don't understand it. :P HEre's the link anyways for those that are interested.

http://www.defenselink.mil/execsec/adr2004/pdf_files/0008_air_force.pdf

www.FourWheelerHB.com

[Zenister 0]

oh i agree there are some very intelligent, motivated individuals giving up better opportunities to help in this conflict..... but there are also a great many that should have failed out of the MOSs they've been assigned...

a shortage of qualified candidates means I have had to retrain some morons on simple tasks like what a mouse is and how to use it to log in, which wastes a lot of time better spent on more complex concepts for the rest.......

____________________________________
Those who fail to learn from the past are simply Doomed.

[slug 1]

Hi Phree

I think everyone who went thru basic training has a story about the guy or guys who was a couple FF short of a Happy Meal.

Some were sent hom to mom after a couple of weeks. Others were assigned to cook school in spite of their dream of carrying a gun.

We also had some rocket scientists that ended up being cooks because they were color blind and the air force need cooks that week.

Since you aren't a sweet young teenage anymore those guy's look young to you and they are, to bad some will never grow old, other will get old before their time.

Thats the reality of war, the military can be tough on it's own, but it's tougher when people are trying to kill you.

Tough job.

R.I.P.

[jcd11235 0]

Suddam is a Sunni Muslim, the minority. The Shiites or the majority. They rose in revolt against Suddam after Desrt Storm, but were easily put down by Saddam when the US failed to support the uprising as promised.

You are right about the necessity of knowing the culture. "Know thy enemy and thyself and you may fight a hundred battles without disaster," Sun Tzu wrote in the Art of War.

The other major lesson we need to heed from Viet Nam is the cost of low troop morale. When troops are refusing missions due to lack of equipment, and asking the Secretary of Defense trap questions, that is not a sign of high troop morale. The lawsuits to get out of the Army when their enlistments are up doesn't paint a very happy picture, either.

All the training and equipment is wasted without a cause worthy of fighting and dying for. IMO Such a cause has not been presented, at least not to our culture, as we fight over armor to protect soldiers from other soldiers who believe in their cause so dearly they are willing to blow themselves up to further it.

Throwing money and lives into a pit of violence is not going to solve the underlying problem. America is going to have to change its foreign policy, or pay the consequences. It doesn't take a political scientist to figure out why it is America that is hated, not Canada, not the Netherlands, not New Zealand, or a host of other free countries. Why not Switzerland? It is because America has the irresponsible foreign policy.

Math tutoring available. Only $6! per hour! First lesson: Factorials!

[dorbie 0]

Quote

I think youre missing one huge factor in this equation: culture. We didn't understand the Vietnamese culture and we dont understand the middle eastern one. To us suicide bombers are insane, yet to some in their culture they are martyrs. Kill an infedel and go straight to heaven where 72 virgins await you. How can we defeat an enemy if we dont understand them? I wonder how many know the difference between a Suni and a Shite, or how important some of their clerics are to them. I forget which one Saddam belongs too, but he prosecuted the other. Dont you think they have a bone to pick for 30 years of being pissed on.

You mentioned something about bombing North Vietnam. Didn't we drop more bombs in Vietnam than we did in WW2. We should've learned from the French in Vietnam, they even told us. Didn't De Gaulle tell Kennedy Vietnam would entrap the USA into a "bottomless military and political swamp". I know many of you cant stand the French, but they did control it from the latter part of the 1800s. Maybe we could've listened and learned from their failure.

I'm not missing it but you make better points than the post that started this thread although the situation is actually closer to the reverse (the Catholic rulling minority in Vietnam vs Buddhist majority is one obvious issue that springs to mind). Let me point out that before every US engagement the US public is warned by chicken littles that it'll be another Vietnam quagmire, its one of the national constants. We were told Afghanistan would be remember?

The facts w.r.t. the conflict won't influence the hysteria. It's a domestic battle for political will, and specious comparrisons to other conflicts aren't illuminating, they're designed to confound rational judgement. Intentianally missleading graphs of casualties with no reguard to the troop dispositions are used to undermine that will, not inform anyone.

w.r.t. the vietnam quagmire it had more to do with untouchable neighbors than local culture, but it was even more ridiculous in that the mighty U.S. didn't even seriously threaten the political center of it's direct enemy when it had the capacity to do so.

Iraq would be more like Vietnam if Saddam was ensconced in say Fallujah and the US wouldn't touch the place meanwhile he was free to fly to Paris and meet with 'diplomats' while Russia and China funneled arms and provided close air support and defence over Fallujah in the North rivalling US Air superiority, while his standing army consisting of multiple divisions attacked the US in the south then retreated over to Iran as the US refused to follow it. Compound this by an incompetent west wing that ties hands with unreasonable rules of engagement that frustrate US fighting ability.

Iraq is nothing like Vietnam. The comparrisons are ludicrous.

Where you drop a bomb is just as important as the fact that you dropped it.

[PhreeZone 15]

Quote

Since you aren't a sweet young teenage anymore those guy's look young to you and they are, to bad some will never grow old, other will get old before their time.

Yep, but I'll put it this way, I'm not out of draft age yet At most I'm 4 -5 years older then most of them and with a younger brother serving right now I fully know just what sacrifaces some of them are making to join up.

Yesterday is history
And tomorrow is a mystery

Parachutemanuals.com

[happythoughts 0]

Quote

I think youre missing one huge factor in this equation: culture. We didn't understand the Vietnamese culture and we dont understand the middle eastern one.

That is why attempted parallels between the two fail.
The cultures are different. Why try to compare the two?

It would be better to look at a similar culture like Iran.

Do a search on Shah of Iran and the CIA.
Seems like this has been done before successfully.
The Shah ruled for 25 years.

[EBSB52 0]

Quote

We couldn't win in Vietnam because it wasn't winnable. It was a classic revolution in a colony. Ultimately they win.
I think the majority of Iraq, unlike Vietnam, preferred the outster of Saddam, but the minority is large enough that this part of the analogy is fine.

But the chart is a bit misleading if it intended to suggest that Iraq is ahead of the curve on death tolls in the first couple years. There are many more US troops in Iraq then there were in the early days of Vietnam. And not all that many more to send in later. There isn't a massively larger peak in front of us. It's bad enough already.

So you're saying the rate is lower in Iraq than with Viet nam. OK, good point, but the death numbers are still way higher and mounting, with Novemeber 04 being the highest as I recall.

I don't consider that a positive attribute that even though the death rate is lower, the death numbers are higher. The constant fact is that we aren't gaining ground and they aren't going to relent, just as VN. Only solution is to leave.

[EBSB52 0]

Quote

Quote

If we want to win this war, I think it's critical to stop declaring victory every month and instead start showing people the reality - that it's going to be a long, hard war against an implacable enemy that will result in thousands of dead US soldiers, trillions of dollars spent and hundreds of thousands of dead civilians. Stop with the speeches about how the terrorists are on the run, the insurgency's back is broken, Bin Laden's days are numbered etc. Begin preparing people for the reality of the war now, and there will be less disillusionment when the fatality rates continue to climb and the first civil war (or mass insurrection, or whatever you want to call the next big battle) begins.

I don't think the war can be sold to the people on those terms. Many didn't support it when they thought it would be over quickly.

The problem lies in the motives for going over. First, we were invading Iraq only as a last resort, if it was determined that Iraq indeed had nuclear/biological/chemical weapons. Then it was about a regime change, which is laughable, considering we installed the Baath Party in Iraq's government. Now it is about installing democracy. Which is also laughable, considering how Shrub got into the Whitehouse.

The current adminastration took the greatest amount of goodwill from the international community that the U.S. has seen in many, many years, and squandered it being a bully. The war in Iraq is unlikely to have popular support as long as Shrub is in office, because lied to the people in order to go.

This all plays into the Fascist American protocol, so get used to it or leave like I wanna do. There is no changing it from within, maybe from without if some country or other collective countries band together to do it. Look at Fascist Italy and Fascist/nazi Germany; they didn't change from within, it took an heroic 1940's America to do it - greatest generation then... yep.

[AggieDave 6]

According to the internet's forum rules, this thread is now done due to referencing Nazi Germany...

--"When I die, may I be surrounded by scattered chrome and burning gasoline."

[EBSB52 0]

Quote

According to the internet's forum rules, this thread is now done due to referencing Nazi Germany...

Oh well, that beats actually having to respond.

[Guest]

Quote

I think a few of the reasons the Vietnam war failed on so many levels (i.e. we didn't win there, and indeed ended up retreating after public support for it disappeared) is that:

a) it was based on false pretenses (the fake attack on the USS Maddox) - had there been an actual act of aggression, we would have had both more cause and more public support for the war.

b) it was sold as a quick war. The Viet Cong could not stand up to the might of the US military, the strongest in the world (so it was said.)

c) people were promised easy victories. Nixon's "secret plan" to end the war is noticeable here, as were several premature declarations of victory and/or truce.

Given all that, we might want to learn from history on this. It's too late to fix a) (despite some valiant attempts to redefine the war) but it's not too late to fix B and C. If we want to win this war, I think it's critical to stop declaring victory every month and instead start showing people the reality - that it's going to be a long, hard war against an implacable enemy that will result in thousands of dead US soldiers, trillions of dollars spent and hundreds of thousands of dead civilians. Stop with the speeches about how the terrorists are on the run, the insurgency's back is broken, Bin Laden's days are numbered etc. Begin preparing people for the reality of the war now, and there will be less disillusionment when the fatality rates continue to climb and the first civil war (or mass insurrection, or whatever you want to call the next big battle) begins.

One reason we could not win in the Vietnam war is that there was a perception in the US that the government had been lying to the people about what was happening over there; that's one reason the pictures brought back by journalists had such an impact. We should not make the same mistakes here.

Attached is a graph I made showing Iraq injuries/fatalities so far, and another one showing the trend in Vietnam. We shouldn't wait until we hit that peak to tell people what to expect.

Oh, puh-leaze!

There you go with Nixon's "Secret Plan", when the war started in the Kennedy Adminstration!

Fer cryin' out loud, Bill! Where has your critical thinking gone? Tell me this isn't a troll.

mh

Edit to add - You know something, Bill? This is the first time I've seen you really drop the ball and get mesmerized by someone else's skewed statistics.

You usually have your own opinion, but it appears that this time, you didn't examine the presentation closely to see the gaping holes before you threw it on the forum.

I at least expected you to temper this silliness with your usual remark that the stats are or may be flawed - were you in a hurry this time?
.

"The mouse does not know life until it is in the mouth of the cat."

[jcd11235 0]

Yeah. Well, being a poor American that only speaks one language, I'm not in the best position to leave right now. I am, ho

Quote

This all plays into the Fascist American protocol, so get used to it or leave like I wanna do. There is no changing it from within, maybe from without if some country or other collective countries band together to do it. Look at Fascist Italy and Fascist/nazi Germany; they didn't change from within, it took an heroic 1940's America to do it - greatest generation then... yep.

Yeah. Well, being a poor American that only speaks one language, I'm not in the best position to leave right now. I am, however looking to pick up a second language. Perhaps I should use different criteria of selection.

In the mean time, I try to think positively. "There is nothing wrong with America that cannot be fixed with what is right with America." -W.J. Clinton, January 1993.

Math tutoring available. Only $6! per hour! First lesson: Factorials!

[Guest]

Quote

The underlying problem here is people object to killing when they see it on their TV but the quiet suffering and murder of millions is OK as long as it doesn't make the headlines. In some cases war is the lesser of two evils.

Chard: "The army doesn't like more than one disaster in a day."

Bromhead: "Looks bad in the newspapers and upsets civilians at their breakfast."

quotes.

mh

.

"The mouse does not know life until it is in the mouth of the cat."

[billvon 2,446]

>As for pretexts and the Maddox, that's irrelevant, Americans
>knew they were there fighting communism . . .

That is precisely what I'm referring to. Our government told us that we were fighting because of the attack on the Maddox. That turned out not to be true. Which means either you misunderstand the cause of war or you realize the government lied to you - neither of which is conducive to garnering public support for a war.

Two years ago we were told that we had to attack Iraq to prevent Saddam's use of WMD's against us. Now that that turns out to not be true either, the tune has changed to "hey, we liberated the grateful Iraqis" until they turned out to not be so grateful, so it changed to "we're fighting a war on terror!" If the government keeps changing the reasons for the war, people will believe that there _is_ no real reason for the war.

>In both cases America had left wing propagandists doing their
>best to undermine the political will to prosecute the war. The
> question is will it work again.

If the government continues to try to sell the war as a glorious crusade against arab terrorists, it won't be long before people see the truth and realize that they are being lied to. Not even the most complacent citizens in the world will support a government who is obviously misleading them. It's time to start being honest with the people who are paying for the war both with their money and their lives. People are starting to demand it - look at the cheers that followed the first criticism of Rumsfeld from a US soldier.

Americans respect honesty. Time to start showing them respect.

[billvon 2,446]

>There you go with Nixon's "Secret Plan", when the war started in
>the Kennedy Adminstration!

?? I agree with you. I didn't claim that Nixon started the war; just that he had a 'secret plan' to end it.

>You usually have your own opinion, but it appears that this time, you
> didn't examine the presentation closely to see the gaping holes
> before you threw it on the forum.

I created the first graph from data from a military website. Check out the website below and then tell me if you think "I didn't see the gaping holes" in their presentation. If you believe that, please point out where the holes are.

http://web1.whs.osd.mil/mmid/casualty/castop.htm

>I at least expected you to temper this silliness with your usual
> remark that the stats are or may be flawed - were you in a hurry this
> time?

The stats, of course, may be flawed. Feel free to post where you believe the error is.

The point here is not to blame anyone. We can do that all we want; it won't help end the war and it won't help our troops in Iraq. What WILL help is honesty. Stop telling people we're about to win. Stop announcing victory. Make it clear we are going to lose thousands of troops and we need thousands of replacements. Forget a draft; ASK people to serve. There are enough people here willing to serve their country if you're straight with them.

Don't sugarcoat the costs or fire people who make honest estimates of it. Make it clear that the cost will be in the trillions. Be honest with US citizens; let them support the war effort instead of a carefully-spun Hollywood version with flight-suited presidents and happy Iraqi children tossing flowers at smiling US soldiers. The people of the US are a lot tougher than some people here believe. They can handle the truth.

[slug 1]

Quote

If the government continues to try to sell the war as a glorious crusade against arab terrorists, it won't be long before people see the truth and realize that they are being lied to. Not even the most complacent citizens in the world will support a government who is obviously misleading them. It's time to start being honest with the people who are paying for the war both with their money and their lives. People are starting to demand it - look at the cheers that followed the first criticism of Rumsfeld from a US soldier.

Americans respect honesty. Time to start showing them respect.

Bill

Haven't you been listening to some of the folks that have been posting on SC about various subject of the iraqi war. Honesty has nothing to do with it they can't see past their blind faith in their political party.


I'll paraphrase some examples of the last few days.

manpower shortage "negative"
,
armor shortage "negative"

the american taxpayers don't want to see their tax's raised to pay to fight the war to win.

The troops got better stuff than we had back in the day they need to suck it up like we did.

Iraqi Freedom fighter "Negative"

And one of my all time favorites "Country right or wrong, love it or leave it"

So truth is only worth something if people will keep a open mind. SC is not a cross section of the american public....... I hope

When we leave Iraq with a positive spin of course We need to support our troops, their families and care of them when they come back. This doesn't have to end up like another VN or Desert storm.

R.I.P.

[GQ_jumper 4]

Quote

I honestly have a hard time believing that some of them were able to pass high school. I've talked to some of the guys as they were waiting on the bus to take them to the airport or waiting on their physical. I've honestly had better conversation with a brick wall then some of them.***

Please don't take this as me reading what you said as a direct insult to all military recruits, i know that wasn't your intention and i'm not trying to put words in the mouth of you and zen. I agree with what you are saying for the most part. But some of those kids that never made it through high school, or don't seem like the brightest ones of the group make some damn fine soldiers. These are the kids that grew up playin outdoors running around, roughing each other up, and things of that nature, so when it comes to the things that cause most people to want to quit, its nothing to these guys. I worked with a pair of twins that were in my platoon when I was in Ranger Battalion, everybody swore they didn't have half a brain between the two of them. But those guys would and could do anything that was asked of them. 9 steely eyed killers like that would make one hell of a squad. Those steely eyes might be a little crosseyed, but hey, no ones perfect, right!! And with the right guidance and development kids like that turn into some outstanding NCO's.

History does not long entrust the care of freedom to the weak or the timid.
--Dwight D. Eisenhower

• Quote

[dorbie 0]

Quote

>As for pretexts and the Maddox, that's irrelevant, Americans
>knew they were there fighting communism . . .

That is precisely what I'm referring to. Our government told us that we were fighting because of the attack on the Maddox. That turned out not to be true. Which means either you misunderstand the cause of war or you realize the government lied to you - neither of which is conducive to garnering public support for a war.

No, the government explicitly stated it's goals w.r.t. opposing communism, or are you denying that the North was communist and the US mentioned this frequently and often. Again, everyone knew what the domino theory was as it related to geopolitical strategy in the region.

Quote

If the government continues to try to sell the war as a glorious crusade against arab terrorists, it won't be long before people see the truth and realize that they are being lied to.

Well you can keep spinning it like that but many don't see the war as the bill of goods you claim and not because they aren't informed. Once again you blatantly beg the question, your whole premise is based on flawed assumptions. In addition you talk as if the facts w.r.t. WMD are not clear to the public after a national election that raised the issues to the fore.

You also ignore the overt publically announced geopolitical strategy of bringing some form of representative democracy and civilization to the Middle East. You and others insist on ignoring the big picture but this is infact the most compelling case in my opinion and it has been stated clearly by this administration for anyone with ears to hear. You ignore iron clad facts about Saddam's support in several forms for terrorists. You want to spin the administration's case as a total lie because it suits your political agenda.

I've already listed many differences between Iraq and Vietnam. There's real people out there with guns planes bombs and support they win wars and the physical disposition of forces matters. To sit back and say we'll lose a war because some irrelevant lie about the Maddox is somehow similar to a lie about WMDs is pure fantasy. It reeks of the kind of political science conceit you see from your average journalist at work in the USA today.

[airborne31582 0]

Quote

The old stuff at Ft lewis is mostly gone. The WW2 barracks with the open bays and a commen head. wood frame with asbestos sideing were about gone and replaced with nice new Brick 1-2 3 story barracks 1-2 guy's to a room about 10yr's ago (North Fort).


.

A lot of the old WW2 barracks are still standing and still in use...I used them a little over a year ago

Chris
I thought of the odds of me succeeding, versus the odds I was doing something incredibly stupid, and I went ahead anyway.

[DrunkMonkey 0]

This is why my discharge date is 1 Feb 05. I'm not gonna be Dubya's stooge anymore.

[PhreeZone 15]

Don't forget about the time you owe to the IRR.

Yesterday is history
And tomorrow is a mystery

Parachutemanuals.com

[freethefly 6]

Hey Billvon, why not go one more step back in time and include Korea into your analysis. Korea seems to be one of the all time greatest failures in "military action" with no visable results. As no conclusion has yet to be drawn from that conflict and that it is still a showdown I believe it would be fair to include it along with Vietnam and Iraq. Also do you have figures on Afghanistan?

"...And once you're gone, you can't come back
When you're out of the blue and into the black."
Neil Young