Why US Generals Were More Successful in World War II than in Korea Vietnam or Iraq and Afghanistan - Politics Forum.org | PoFo

Wandering the information superhighway, he came upon the last refuge of civilization, PoFo, the only forum on the internet ...

Ongoing wars and conflict resolution, international agreements or lack thereof. Nationhood, secessionist movements, national 'home' government versus internationalist trends and globalisation.

Moderator: PoFo Political Circus Mods

Forum rules: No one line posts please.
#15200924
Thomas E. Ricks is the author of the bestselling Fiasco: The American Military Adventure In Iraq (2006) and its follow-up, The Gamble: General David Petraeus and the American Military Adventure in Iraq, 2006–2008 (2009); The Generals: American Military Command from World War II to Today (2012). I have read all of these books when they were published a decade ago and I wrote academic theses on this very subject (America's postwar conflicts) in Britain. America had not won many wars since World War II (Korea, Vietnam) because it was the Cold War against the Soviet Union, which was an American ally during World War II. North Koreans and North Vietnamese did receive Soviet aid. America could not use the ultimate weapon against them to win these wars as it feared a Soviet retaliatory strike. Communist China also played a role in preventing an American victory in Korea and Vietnam. America's failure to win postwar conflicts cannot be solely attributed to American military generals' individual qualities.

In this video, investigative reporter Azmat Khan and former US ambassador to Afghanistan Michael McKinley explain what the US military was actually doing in Afghanistan, what it got wrong, and why America’s long intervention there is considered a failure.

Last edited by ThirdTerm on 05 Dec 2021 04:00, edited 1 time in total.
#15200938
I've seen that video before. He totally misunderstands the problem. The military success of the US in Afghanistan was staggering, way way beyond the puny achievements of the world wars. The US and its allies captured Kabul and Kandahar in weeks. the US entered World War II in December 1941, it took over three and half years for them to capture Tokyo. Germany was even worse. The US entered World War I in April 1917, Berlin didn't fall for 27 years till April 1945. Look at Vietnam, Afghanistan or Iraq. Its military victory, after military victory after military victory.

The difference in 1945 was the Soviet Union. Any whining by Germany and Japan after 1945 and America could just threaten to up stumps and leave. It was the threat of the Soviet Union that meant one victory was enough for Japan. It meant that two victories was enough for Germany. The hard right militarists of Germany and Japan rather than plotting to overturn the result of 1945 were the ones that most wanted the United States to stay and defend them.

https://ja.wikipedia.org/wiki/2%E6%9C%8818%E6%97%A[…]

The US cannot field a 150k army full complete ab[…]

@noemon @Beren @Rancid @JohnRawls @Scamp […]

@QatzelOk is coming off as very capitalist right[…]