American military strength and capability is overated.

Three simple points as to why I think this:

1.Crippling mismanagement. The military is undermined constantly by politicians in Washington. Its either with using the military to establish puppet Governments overseas instead of winning wars efficiently or its undermining the efficiency of the military itself; let's be real here, injecting gender eglatarianism in a organization designed for killing armed combatants and subjugating foreign nations is utterly brain dead thinking and not even something that gains you much public support (or wouldn't if Americans in general had a better concept of war aside from a guy holding a gun that magically doesn't recoil shooting armed combatants).

2. How many notable wars have we actually won since WWII (the Pacific theatre anyway)that weren't bittersweet victories even with all of our technological advantages? The only one I can think of was the second Gulf War and frankly,I personally feel that the majority of Sadaam's army deserting him and that Sadaam himself was essentially a more incompetent and ineffectual version of Hitler from a strategical standpoint helped minimize American losses.

3. Any military kind of requires that there are men willing to answer the call of duty instead of, you know, dodge the draft in mass (or at least widespread enough to the point that it was actually noticable to the broader public) like what happened during the Vietnam draft. Mind you, this was during 1960 and I don't beleive for a second that the welfare of American young men have improved from that time (societal ridicule, a lesser sense of purpose, being overshadowed by female peers in employment and college enrollment, and rampant increases of single parenthood from the time vs the risevideogames and porn). At some point, hiring mercanaries has to become more cost effective than instituting a draft withlow rates of return.

Technological, industiral, and natural resource edges aside, these three factors I outlined really lead me to beleive that our military is vastly overated in terms of general performance (though I beleive that we're still one of the best relative to other countries, mind you).

I thought this was going to be an Anti-war thread. I'm glad its not. I think you make some good points, exactly what you said can applied to vietnam in particular.

Our capability to wage war is absolutely unmatched. Anyone who has done any amount of research on equipment, budgets, etc., will find that nobody comes close. The wars of today are much different, and are not force on force. Our capabilities are not overrated.

While I'm not an expert by any means, I'm not sure what you're getting at by notable victories. I can't really think (off hand) of any conflicts in a long time that have been MILITARY tactical failures. People ignorant to the subject tend to point out Vietnam as a military defeat, and that is hogwash. The turning point that made us get out of the war was the Tet Offensive, and that was a military disaster for the North Vietnam. They were crushed at nearly every point in their offensive MILITARILY. What it did do was cause even more unrest towards the war. Citizens were told one thing about the war, only to turn on the television to see something else. Don't get it twisted: the Tet Offensive was a success in that it forced the United States to eventually exit, but it was a military failure in every sense of the word. I'm rambling, but again, can't really think of any military failures.

How many notable wars have we actually won since WWII (the Pacific theatre anyway)that weren't bittersweet victories even with all of our technological advantages?

That's directly related to another question: How many wars have we fought since WWII that were traditional wars against other militaries instead of guerilla wars against rebels and insurgents?

All militaries have immense trouble fighting guerilla wars because nearly all military technology becomes useless when your enemy doesn't have uniforms, facilities, or vehicles (for example, Afghanistan was the USSR's Vietnam, and modern day Russia still has trouble combating Chechnyan terrorists.). Jet fighters, bombs, and cruise missles aren't going to really do you much good against an enemy that looks like civilians and only pops out of the woodwork long enough to take out a few of your men before disappearing again.

Anyway, if you look at the wars the US has fought that ARE traditional wars, we do frighteningly well in them. The Gulf Wars (excluding the occupation of Iraq which has been a guerilla war) and the 1995 Bosnia bombing runs are some good examples.

I agree with the third point very well. Military is looked down upon in the States. It is not respected as much as it should be. I heard many people say we will run away if they ever brought back the draft. No one cares anymore...No one wants to fight for their country. I'm scared of a time when the U.S. wiill be attacked(and it will one day) and the people will not stand and fight but run away. MgamerBD

[QUOTE="MgamerBD"]I agree with the third point very well. Military is looked down upon in the States. It is not respected as much as it should be. I heard many people say we will run away if they ever brought back the draft. No one cares anymore...No one wants to fight for their country. I'm scared of a time when the U.S. wiill be attacked(and it will one day) and the people will not stand and fight but run away. BMD004

And do you realize that the war in Iraq WAS a traditional war? The USA stormed the capitol and overthrew the country in 2 weeks, with no bumps along the way. They pretty much just stormed right through Iraq as fast as their vehicles could get them there.

Where is Saddam? Oh, yeah... he's dead.

In a traditional war against a COUNTRY, the USA is unmatched. They will obliterate any country on Earth in a traditional war.

The problems are the occupations. The guerilla warfare. BUT, the good thing is, the USA is becoming BETTER at fighting those types of wars. While all of the other countries are sitting on the sidelines, the USA is having good practice at fighting those types of wars. They are using trial and error, and implementing new tactics.

So not only is the USA the strongest at traditional warfare, one could argue that they are the best at fighting guerilla warfare, as well. Because not only are they the most advanced military on Earth, but they have had lots of practice at fighting a guerilla war.

You UNDERESTIMATE the USA's military.

[QUOTE="BMD004"][QUOTE="MgamerBD"]I agree with the third point very well. Military is looked down upon in the States. It is not respected as much as it should be. I heard many people say we will run away if they ever brought back the draft. No one cares anymore...No one wants to fight for their country. I'm scared of a time when the U.S. wiill be attacked(and it will one day) and the people will not stand and fight but run away. MgamerBD

[QUOTE="BMD004"][QUOTE="MgamerBD"]I agree with the third point very well. Military is looked down upon in the States. It is not respected as much as it should be. I heard many people say we will run away if they ever brought back the draft. No one cares anymore...No one wants to fight for their country. I'm scared of a time when the U.S. wiill be attacked(and it will one day) and the people will not stand and fight but run away. MgamerBD

Heck if only 1% of the US was fit for active duty that's over 3 million people. We are a industrialized nation of 300 million and growing after all.

If anything we employ too many personnel (which consumes most the military budget).

In terms of actual war.....we haven't lost any. So I'm not sure what you're getting at here. A recent example is the actual Iraq War which was won in short notice.LJS9502_basic

[QUOTE="LJS9502_basic"]In terms of actual war.....we haven't lost any. So I'm not sure what you're getting at here. A recent example is the actual Iraq War which was won in short notice.Lonelynight

[QUOTE="Lonelynight"][QUOTE="LJS9502_basic"]In terms of actual war.....we haven't lost any. So I'm not sure what you're getting at here. A recent example is the actual Iraq War which was won in short notice.LJS9502_basic

[QUOTE="LJS9502_basic"]In terms of actual war.....we haven't lost any. So I'm not sure what you're getting at here. A recent example is the actual Iraq War which was won in short notice.Lonelynight

Are there Texans still serving in the military? I will give you a chance to look over everyone. ... ... ... ... *just look for the soldiers that are bigger, faster, stronger, and sexier than the rest* ... ... ... Now you found them. So in answer to your question: Given that our fighting force contains a vast number of Texans, our strength cannot be overstatedrawsavon

[QUOTE="rawsavon"]Are there Texans still serving in the military? I will give you a chance to look over everyone. ... ... ... ... *just look for the soldiers that are bigger, faster, stronger, and sexier than the rest* ... ... ... Now you found them. So in answer to your question: Given that our fighting force contains a vast number of Texans, our strength cannot be overstatedsurrealnumber5

[QUOTE="surrealnumber5"][QUOTE="rawsavon"]Are there Texans still serving in the military? I will give you a chance to look over everyone. ... ... ... ... *just look for the soldiers that are bigger, faster, stronger, and sexier than the rest* ... ... ... Now you found them. So in answer to your question: Given that our fighting force contains a vast number of Texans, our strength cannot be overstatedrawsavon

[QUOTE="rawsavon"][QUOTE="surrealnumber5"] ugh, texans are only bigger faster and stronger when compared to foreign populations, they are quite average in these united statessurrealnumber5

...I also forgot to mention what a huge tax % you have big boy.
I am insanely jealous

[QUOTE="surrealnumber5"][QUOTE="rawsavon"] The only thing bigger when it comes to other states is their... debtrawsavon

...I also forgot to mention what a huge tax % you have big boy.
I am insanely jealous

Our military strength is fine, but it's run by diplomats and therefore we give our troops very difficult rules of engagement.

Our military strength is fine, but it's run by diplomats and therefore we give our troops very difficult rules of engagement.

YellowOneKinobi

[QUOTE="rawsavon"]

[QUOTE="surrealnumber5"] girs sure do like the size of our "debt" we be BALLIN!surrealnumber5

...I also forgot to mention what a huge tax % you have big boy.
I am insanely jealous

...feels good man

And do you realize that the war in Iraq WAS a traditional war? The USA stormed the capitol and overthrew the country in 2 weeks, with no bumps along the way. They pretty much just stormed right through Iraq as fast as their vehicles could get them there.

Where is Saddam? Oh, yeah... he's dead.

In a traditional war against a COUNTRY, the USA is unmatched. They will obliterate any country on Earth in a traditional war.

The problems are the occupations. The guerilla warfare. BUT, the good thing is, the USA is becoming BETTER at fighting those types of wars. While all of the other countries are sitting on the sidelines, the USA is having good practice at fighting those types of wars. They are using trial and error, and implementing new tactics.

So not only is the USA the strongest at traditional warfare, one could argue that they are the best at fighting guerilla warfare, as well. Because not only are they the most advanced military on Earth, but they have had lots of practice at fighting a guerilla war.

You UNDERESTIMATE the USA's military.

BMD004

The thread creator should take his three talking points and see how they apply to other countries.

Our capability to wage war is absolutely unmatched. Anyone who has done any amount of research on equipment, budgets, etc., will find that nobody comes close. The wars of today are much different, and are not force on force. Our capabilities are not overrated.

KSU-Wildcat

This, basically. The United States military has a far greater ability to project combat power than any other military. This is accomplished by having a sizeable standing Army (yes, and the Marines) that can deploy on shot notice, and through aircraft carrier battlegroups. Nobody else has these two things in the quantities the US does.

The US military in 2011 is about technology - remote-controlled destruction.

Drones, satellites, computer hacking, cellular interception...

You can run an entire war from an iPad if you wanted.

They get such an overwhelming amount of funds that it has to be by far the greatest physical army in the world... I just don't know what good that will do...

Another thing that needs to be mentioned is how armed US citizens are as a poplulace. No other world power has the number of civilian owned firearms that the United States does. Red Dawn, Homefront and all of the other ficticious accounts of the US being invaded and subjugated simply would not happen. I am not saying that it would fall to the people alone (the home based military force is quite substantial) but it would be foolish of an invading nation to ignore the possibility of deadly and capable resistance from the common American.

Another thing that needs to be mentioned is how armed US citizens are as a poplulace. No other world power has the number of civilian owned firearms that the United States does. Red Dawn, Homefront and all of the other ficticious accounts of the US being invaded and subjugated simply would not happen. I am not saying that it would fall to the people alone (the home based military force is quite substantial) but it would be foolish of an invading nation to ignore the possibility of deadly and capable resistance from the common American.

luamhtrad

[QUOTE="luamhtrad"]

Another thing that needs to be mentioned is how armed US citizens are as a poplulace. No other world power has the number of civilian owned firearms that the United States does. Red Dawn, Homefront and all of the other ficticious accounts of the US being invaded and subjugated simply would not happen. I am not saying that it would fall to the people alone (the home based military force is quite substantial) but it would be foolish of an invading nation to ignore the possibility of deadly and capable resistance from the common American.

KungfuKitten

Unless the american population supports the invasion.

[QUOTE="KungfuKitten"][QUOTE="luamhtrad"]

Another thing that needs to be mentioned is how armed US citizens are as a poplulace. No other world power has the number of civilian owned firearms that the United States does. Red Dawn, Homefront and all of the other ficticious accounts of the US being invaded and subjugated simply would not happen. I am not saying that it would fall to the people alone (the home based military force is quite substantial) but it would be foolish of an invading nation to ignore the possibility of deadly and capable resistance from the common American.

YellowOneKinobi

Unless the american population supports the invasion.

[QUOTE="surrealnumber5"][QUOTE="rawsavon"]Are there Texans still serving in the military? I will give you a chance to look over everyone. ... ... ... ... *just look for the soldiers that are bigger, faster, stronger, and sexier than the rest* ... ... ... Now you found them. So in answer to your question: Given that our fighting force contains a vast number of Texans, our strength cannot be overstatedrawsavon

Could be. Though I think it more likely be an independent situation. Most Mexicans I know (usually second or third generation) love Mexico but are glad to no longer be thererawsavon

I suggest you start reading up on types of warfare. In terms of force and traditional conflict, the US is unmatched. Come on, OT...seriously.

Yah, no.

The problem is not overating actual military strength and capability.

The problem is over expectation of what military strength and capability can accomplish.

You can crush an opponents armies. You cannot force peace. You cannot nation build, etc.

The raison d'etre of a military is to wage war. The US military is highly effective at that mission.Using it in another mission is an entirely different proposition.

overrated compared to who?comp_atkins

[QUOTE="comp_atkins"]overrated compared to who?surrealnumber5

Three simple points as to why I think this:

1.Crippling mismanagement. The military is undermined constantly by politicians in Washington. Its either with using the military to establish puppet Governments overseas instead of winning wars efficiently or its undermining the efficiency of the military itself; let's be real here, injecting gender eglatarianism in a organization designed for killing armed combatants and subjugating foreign nations is utterly brain dead thinking and not even something that gains you much public support (or wouldn't if Americans in general had a better concept of war aside from a guy holding a gun that magically doesn't recoil shooting armed combatants).

2. How many notable wars have we actually won since WWII (the Pacific theatre anyway)that weren't bittersweet victories even with all of our technological advantages? The only one I can think of was the second Gulf War and frankly,I personally feel that the majority of Sadaam's army deserting him and that Sadaam himself was essentially a more incompetent and ineffectual version of Hitler from a strategical standpoint helped minimize American losses.

3. Any military kind of requires that there are men willing to answer the call of duty instead of, you know, dodge the draft in mass (or at least widespread enough to the point that it was actually noticable to the broader public) like what happened during the Vietnam draft. Mind you, this was during 1960 and I don't beleive for a second that the welfare of American young men have improved from that time (societal ridicule, a lesser sense of purpose, being overshadowed by female peers in employment and college enrollment, and rampant increases of single parenthood from the time vs the risevideogames and porn). At some point, hiring mercanaries has to become more cost effective than instituting a draft withlow rates of return.

Technological, industiral, and natural resource edges aside, these three factors I outlined really lead me to beleive that our military is vastly overated in terms of general performance (though I beleive that we're still one of the best relative to other countries, mind you).

I agree with the third point very well. Military is looked down upon in the States. It is not respected as much as it should be. I heard many people say we will run away if they ever brought back the draft. No one cares anymore...No one wants to fight for their country. I'm scared of a time when the U.S. wiill be attacked(and it will one day) and the people will not stand and fight but run away. MgamerBD

... The majority of military actions past WW2 had nothing to do with defense but of political and economic gain.. The US in a post 1950's environment is a extremely imperialistic one at best, most citizens would never support such actions.. A clear example of this was with the first gulf war when Bush adminstration went out and said they were doing this for economic reasons.. It got immense criticism and unpopularity for it.. So they back pedaled and said it was about "saving the people".

So not only is the USA the strongest at traditional warfare, one could argue that they are the best at fighting guerilla warfare, as well.

BMD004

[QUOTE="BMD004"]

So not only is the USA the strongest at traditional warfare, one could argue that they are the best at fighting guerilla warfare, as well.

Ninja-Hippo

I just wanna say my 2cents but the US amde a huge mistake in the way they fought the Vietnam War, and they had alot of time to change their tactics but instead they continued to fail and ran away in the end and the country they were trying to stop from turning communist was taken out.

Also the US military atm is pretty good but so is pretty much every other western countries military.