From: ravis@axion.bt.co.uk (Richard Avis)
Newsgroups: soc.culture.british,alt.war
Subject: Re: BBN II -- Murk-o-Vision World Update (Mau Mau)
Date: 30 Jul 92 09:59:02 GMT
Reply-To: ravis@axion.bt.co.uk (Richard Avis)
Organization: British Telecom Research Labs


In article <NIGEL.92Jul29184225@rs733.GSFC.NASA.Gov>, nigel@rs733.GSFC.NASA.Gov writes:
|> In article <1992Jul29.150823@axion.bt.co.uk> ravis@axion.bt.co.uk (Richard Avis) writes:
|>  
|>    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.
There is a big difference between garrisoning a country and defending it.
It's a big step between spending money to send your citizens across the seas
to live in nice comfortable bases ans actually getting them to risk death and
injury. The North Vietnamese realised that the USA had no real stomach for a 
prolonged ACTIVE role in Vietnam because it wanted `The Big Win'. But the 
whole strategy could only ever lead to a score draw without a continuing
defence of South Vietnam.
|> 
|> 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.
See above.
|> 
|> 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.
|> 
But there are VERY few armies with quite the capacity for collapse and
self-destruction. Witness the roughly 10,000 friendly fire casualties in
Vietnam, the collapse during the first major Chinese offensive in Korea
and the weakness of line US infantry against their German counterparts in WW2,
despite massive fire-power advantages.

If I show contempt it's not intended. The US military is very representative
of the USA and suffers accordingly. Unlike a TRUELY professional service, the maintenance
of discipline when it goes to war is based on a common cause amongst a bunch
of individuals, and with the public. The origins of its members are too
disparate to maintain cohesion when that sense of `purpose' goes. 
This happened in Vietnam - and discipline began to suffer.

A REAL professional service is the French Foreign Legion. Formed
from the scum of many different nations, discipline is based on
unquestioning obedience and swift retribution for those who
renege on their commitments. They will fight any war, no matter
how desperate or unpopular and will fight virtually to the death.

The US military is founded on democracy and its principles are
excellent, but it can't serve in unpopular circumstances.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------

Richard Avis (Mr. Forgettable)

EMail : ravis@axion.bt.co.uk
Mail : BT Laboratories,
       Martlesham Heath,
       Ipswich,
       Suffolk,
       IP5 7RE.

"We had to destroy Ben Tre in order to save it." - Unknown U.S. Army Major

===========================================================================