next »

[aardvark]

I actually don't know what exactly cabal means [...]

You know, in the time it took you to confess your ignorance, you could have looked it up ...

This is pretty funny.  Should we tell him?

[jackie_d]

If he is regarding to century as the last hundred years rather than the last 7, I think he is referring to WWII.

I expect that you are right.  But is he then saying that we lost WWI?

What about the Cold War? It did non magically end, it was won by United States in 1989.

[beacon1]

If he is regarding to century as the last hundred years rather than the last 7, I think he is referring to WWII.

I expect that you are right.  But is he then saying that we lost WWI?

What about the Cold War? It did non magically end, it was won by United States in 1989.

What pyshnov and others want is an example of a decisive victory post WWII. The problem with demanding this example is that the idea of victory in the modern era is a complex one- namely, because we do not seek to occupy/acquire land. World War II was seen as a victory because at its end we 1) occupied the enemies land indefinitely, and 2) there was a document of surrender. Kuwait was a decisive battle. Iraq, Korea, Vietnam, the Cold War (all of which had no formal declaration of war), are up for debate because our mission was not to take land from aggressors but rather to prevent something from occurring. This is harder to measure and as a consequence hard to get agreement on victory. Probably what is so laughable about Bush's banner of "victory" is that victory in Iraq will ALWAYS be debated. Militarily Iraq is probably the most spectacular, impressive, land battle of all times. We traveled further and controlled more land in a few weeks than what has ever been achieved in military history.

[spork]

Militarily Iraq is probably the most spectacular, impressive, land battle of all times. We traveled further and controlled more land in a few weeks than what has ever been achieved in military history.

Nazi blitzkrieg through the Low Countries and France?  The Mongols in the 13th century?

[aardvark]

Militarily Iraq is probably the most spectacular, impressive, land battle of all times. We traveled further and controlled more land in a few weeks than what has ever been achieved in military history.

Nazi blitzkrieg through the Low Countries and France?  The Mongols in the 13th century?

beacon1, that was a weird thing to say.  The far traveling itself was a piece of cake, what with planes and boats and all-- and it wasn't even done by land.  And it's not like Iraq is THAT big, nor is it clear how much of it we control. 

And spork's examples are indeed more impressive.  Considering how modern France's military was, the fact that they had one generation earlier fought a war of attrition with 1.4 million deaths (I seem to recall-- anyway, a far bigger number of casualties than Americans have ever been willing to sustain, even if you add up every American war ever ever, give France props, eh?) and would have seem prepared once again to "Never surrender,"-- and considering that they were allied with Britain and had British troops on their soil at the time-- the thorough Nazi subjugation (and subdivision) of France in about 6 weeks was quite impressive while it lasted.  And there's no reason to think it wouldn't have lasted a good long while if the USSR, UK, and USA hadn't thrown their entire combined might at defeating Hitler...

And the Mongols... my god, man.  Think what they could have done if they'd had an air force.  (I recommend Weatherford's Genghis Khan and the Making of the Modern World, by the way).

On the other hand, I'm not sure we should use the word "battle" for any of these examples (including Iraq); and the complete Mongol conquest took several battles over several years.

[adhoc]

What about the Cold War? It did non magically end, it was won by United States in 1989.

If you are joking then just skip on to the next post.

But if you are not joking, I would point out that the cold war was, by definition, not a war.

[aardvark]

What about the Cold War? It did non magically end, it was won by United States in 1989.

If you are joking then just skip on to the next post.

But if you are not joking, I would point out that the cold war was, by definition, not a war.

And the date is off, too.  As soon as Gorbachev said "this is stoopid" and unilaterally renounced the Brezhnev Doctrine and told the US "we quit," the CW was over.  I think by 1989 one refers to the Berlin Wall, but once the Brez Doctrine was gone, the Berlin Wall was not, per se, a CW issue any more. 

I do give Ronald Reagan credit for ignoring his neocon advisors and actually negotiating with Gorby-- RR showed some flexibility there that lots of neocons a) criticized him for at the time, and b) want us to forget so they can pretend it was their policies that won the CW.

[jackie_d]

What about the Cold War? It did non magically end, it was won by United States in 1989.

If you are joking then just skip on to the next post.

But if you are not joking, I would point out that the cold war was, by definition, not a war.

I was only trying to remind Pys. that the US were successful in their "war" against USSR. I am not saying that they were responsible for Sovietic collapse, but that such a collapse allowed the US to be the dominating superpower.

BTW, Juris is right in his narrative.

[beacon1]

Militarily Iraq is probably the most spectacular, impressive, land battle of all times. We traveled further and controlled more land in a few weeks than what has ever been achieved in military history.

Nazi blitzkrieg through the Low Countries and France?  The Mongols in the 13th century?

beacon1, that was a weird thing to say.  The far traveling itself was a piece of cake, what with planes and boats and all-- and it wasn't even done by land.  And it's not like Iraq is THAT big, nor is it clear how much of it we control. 

And spork's examples are indeed more impressive.  Considering how modern France's military was, the fact that they had one generation earlier fought a war of attrition with 1.4 million deaths (I seem to recall-- anyway, a far bigger number of casualties than Americans have ever been willing to sustain, even if you add up every American war ever ever, give France props, eh?) and would have seem prepared once again to "Never surrender,"-- and considering that they were allied with Britain and had British troops on their soil at the time-- the thorough Nazi subjugation (and subdivision) of France in about 6 weeks was quite impressive while it lasted.  And there's no reason to think it wouldn't have lasted a good long while if the USSR, UK, and USA hadn't thrown their entire combined might at defeating Hitler...

And the Mongols... my god, man.  Think what they could have done if they'd had an air force.  (I recommend Weatherford's Genghis Khan and the Making of the Modern World, by the way).

On the other hand, I'm not sure we should use the word "battle" for any of these examples (including Iraq); and the complete Mongol conquest took several battles over several years.

I'm not referring to elements of valor or casualties but of military might. Arguably, at no point in history, has a military been so overwhelmingly superior to a serious opponent. In the first gulf war, Iraq had the world's forth largest army - and we decimated it with few casualties. Our military is even stronger now. The reason we are unable to control Iraq is not because of military weakness, but because we are unwilling to use the full might of our military. The Huns, as I understand, were great at inflicting their will. They would send a messenger ahead of the raid party to let the town folk know that if one Hun was injured, then the whole town (men, women, and children) would be destroyed. Word spread quickly. We are unwilling to resort to the level of unspeakable violence that is required to gain "full control". Winning hearts and minds has proven to be ineffective.

As far as spectacular, the battle of Boridino is probably the most impressive battle ever fought.

[aardvark]

As far as spectacular, the battle of Boridino is probably the most impressive battle ever fought.

Ah, and on another thread I've been trying my best to champion War and Peace :)