From: nigel@rs733.GSFC.NASA.Gov
Subject: Re: BBN II -- Murk-o-Vision World Update (Mau Mau)
Organization: Goddard Space Flight Center, Greenbelt, Md, USA
	<NIGEL.92Jul28114609@rs733.GSFC.NASA.Gov>
	<1992Jul29.150823@axion.bt.co.uk>
Date: Wed, 29 Jul 1992 23:42:25 GMT

In article <1992Jul29.150823@axion.bt.co.uk> ravis@axion.bt.co.uk (Richard Avis) writes:

[much deleted]

[US better equipped deleted]

   This is a moot point. Firstly, the US forces certainly have an abundance of
   equipment but the quality sometimes sucks. The best example is NBC
   equipment for protection against Nerve and Bio agents. The US Army issue
   is crap whereas the British Army spends large amounts of money giving
   each soldier decent NBC gear. This is a matter of doctrine because the US 
   relies on retaliation in this department.

Granted that US MOPP-4 gear isn't quite as nice as Brit (or German)
versions we do give them to our troops.  Nobody has anything decent in
the "B" part of the NBC equation.  We at least finally have a decent
NBC recon vehicle (yes, it's German...).  Face it...there is no fine
line between tactical use of NBC weapons and strategic usage.

Retaliation is the best deterrent in this scenario because most of the
time the long persistant modern chemical agents will render your
troops ineffective in a matter of hours anyway from heat exaustion.
 
   Secondly, I think questioning the dedication and commitment of the US 
   armed forces is  VERY valid. As a whole they have no concept of prolonged
   military commitments and what we might call `low-intensity' warfare.
   This is because they were created as a tool to defend `democracy'
   rather than as a tool with which to create and maintain an empire.

Who wants an empire?  It costs to damn much for too little return in
the modern world.  Who has an empire left to defend anyway?  

You might consider that the US has been guarding Europe for over 40
bloody years, Japan and the Phillipines (well until recently) for the
same period and Korea for almost as long.  Vietnam was certainly not
over in a week either.

I think that you may wish to rethink the statement that the US
military has "no concept of prolonged military commitments".  The fact
that our economy is in such disrepair is in part because we have been
honoring those commitments.

   However, as individuals the US forces are full of `economic conscripts',
   many from poorer states, who joined to get money for college.
   The way some of these people tried to wriggle out of their commitments 
   at the time of the Gulf War was incredible.

Some people don't want to get shot at...gee I wonder why.  You might
note that the bulk of these same 'economic conscripts' did stick
around to fight and get shot at.  You might also note that overall
morale was high and the job well done...not something you normally see
from 'conscripts'.

I sense a note of contempt here for the quality your average American
soldier...you may feel as superior as you like Mr Avis but frankly I
would put them up against any other army in the world.  There may be
armys bigger (one or two) and there may be armies better trained (few)
but there are no armies bigger and better trained.

   |> 
   |> My guess is that any future US military ventures will follow that
   |> model and not leave troops around to get truck bombed or putter about
   |> for years with no clear objectives.
   |> 

   The level of deaths amongst the mainland regular army is now very low.
   Most deaths nowadays are in the Royal Irish Regiment and the RUC.
   More succesful than `Vietnamisation' ever was.....

I'm not sure this is something to be so proud of...I certainly
wouldn't be crowing about US (or even Texas National Guard) troops
garrisoning part of Texas and still getting shot at by the Texas
Republican Army.  

As for my reference above I was actually refering to the Marines lost
in Lebanon...not IRA casualties...if the US military is a little
gunshy of being sent places where they can't do any good other than
serving as target practice for the natives at least they're learning
that sending the troops in is not always the answer.  As unbelievable
as it seems even the politicans are catching on...at least the bright
ones...  Hopefully the US will not be repeating Lebanon or Vietnam any
time in the near future.

Frankly, I think that the White House has learned that lesson more
than Whitehall.  The last half-assed British military venture went
well for you.  The Falklands could easily have cost the RN dearly...

   Richard Avis (Mr. Forgettable)

Nigel Tzeng
--
Nigel Tzeng
.sig under construction
Xref: sparky soc.culture.british:10714 soc.culture.usa:6228