Why has the US military had such a spotty success rate since WW2? For all the money, resources, time, and manpower we spend feeding the MIC, there hasn't been a major military victory that has led to lasting peace in the combat zone. The only place our intervention has secured peace, safety, democracy, etc. Was arguably Grenada in 1983. The rest, such as Iraq, Afghanistan, and Vietnam, were merely short-run military wins; instead of geopolitical victories, those wars destabilized said regions and allowed for despots to rise.
>US military had such a spotty success rate since WW2
nigger... you what ? usa military completely buttfucked everyone and everything they have faced, like vietnam military wise was one of the most one-sided wars in human history, military don't do politics, politics do politics so you can blame political failures on military
Isaac Nelson
>usa military completely buttfucked everyone and everything they have faced, like vietnam military wise was one of the most one-sided wars in human history, military don't do politics, politics do politics so you can blame political failures on military I addressed that. But the objective of said buttfucking was to project America's political interests onto the region. They won all the battles, but still lost the war.
Nolan Cruz
Because the military is a form of achieving political goals, and the US generally gets their political goals done during the war and then fucks off.
Luis Ross
Thus it's less of a military problem and more of a democrats problem
Tyler Nguyen
But the point of a military is to accomplish political objectives. And if they fail to do that...
Cameron Richardson
Or is it because maybe not all the third world Literally Who despots are s threat to muh democracy? Or maybe because you can't make other people like you by barging into their country and lighting their shit on fire for the lulz?
Matthew Sullivan
I think some of it might have to do with US success in WW2 and trying to take what worked then into the more complicated era of MAD and closely intertwined global economy. WW2 was a total victory won with massive application of force all the way up to nukes. But when potential foes also had nukes, and the global economy became more complex and interconnected, big wars with big military wins aren't necessarily as useful for achieving geopolitical goals. Global access to media that shows exactly what terrible stuff is involved in warfare makes it harder to effectively fight also.
It's hard to defeat insurgents backed by powers that can't be touched because they have nukes. And it's hard to bomb industrial centers full of civilians into oblivion when everyone has a smartphone. As for why the US has struggled to adapt to the new situations and remained stuck in the WW2 mentality even after 70 years, I'm not so sure.
Jace Long
Politics. War is only good for society when your fighting "the good fight" anything less than that and you'll have dipshit dissenters that sway the media and hence political opinion. Almost every war we've fought in the last century could've easily been won, if the dipshits back home would've been willing to use this obscenely powerful military we have. It also doesn't help that media has been able to seep into every facet of our modern lives thanks to all the tech we've been inventing.
Joshua Bennett
War and politics have never been separate.
All politics is essentially forcing your wills on others, the military is the ultimate show of force a state wields
The US military has been ineffective in its jobs since WW2. Not achieving it's goals. Yes you can brag about how you bombed the most people, but if you cannot even defeat rice farmers and goat herders, then what good are you?
Angel Gray
>we didn't win because some bleeding-heart faggots cried We could have also won said wars by not starting them in the first place. Rice farmers and dune coons on the other side of the planet are not threatening muh freedumbs. When America was non-interventionist (pre-1917 and pre-1941), we kept to our own business and kicked some ass whenever foreigners started getting their tentacles in our shit.
Hunter Brooks
America was expansionist and imperialist since its inception
How do you accomplish political objectives when the politicians make them unobtainable?
Lucas Harris
It's not that the goals are unobtainable, it's that they're undefined and vague.
Hunter Brown
Maybe the military should do a better job and not get bogged down in some quagmire for 10+ years. Then their efforts wouldn't lose support
WW2 took 6 years. The greatest conflict in human civilization There is no excuse
Charles Flores
This
When we have clear-cut goals like "remove x from power" or "force y into a treaty" US can do that very, very well. Its the "war on nebulous and ill-defined concept" that becomes a problem
>Und ve lost ze Great War because ze Jews poisoned public opinion, ja.
Dylan Brown
The "problem" is the real objective: endless war for profit.
Justin Hernandez
our sole post cold war objective to preserve the state of Israel has been a resounding success
Asher Thomas
Politics let the military get bogged down.
If it were up to the commanders, their cities would have been annihilated Curtis LeMay was an incredibly cold, win at all costs, individual.
Stop being a faggot.
Ethan Perry
Panama?
Noah Jones
I thought that was just CIA shenanigans, not an actual military intervention
Ryder Martin
What are you, 12?
Mason Williams
What happened is that Noriega was a CIA asset, and a torturing, murdering, drug dealing scumbag.
As the Cold War started to wind down, the US government tried to get him to stop doing those things, especially the drug dealing, and he responded by attacking US military personnel in Panama.
This then resulted in Bush Senior (former director of the CIA) invading Panama and deposing Noriega.
Because this was Bush Senior and not Bush Junior, everything was planned out carefully, a new President was sworn in within 24 hours of Noriega's ouster, and the war was over so quickly that most Americans don't remember it.
Blake Edwards
>Maybe the military should do a better job and not get bogged down in some quagmire for 10+ years. >Then their efforts wouldn't lose support >"the civilian population wouldnt be made at you bombing the absolute shit out of civilian targets" >"dude trust me I've been on for years I know military history and tatics dude"
>WW2 took 6 years. The greatest conflict in human civilization There is no excuse >comparing americas post ww2 wars to ww2 in literally in measure
>*"the civilian population wouldnt be mad at you bombing the absolute shit out of civilian targets"* >*"dude trust me I've been on Jow Forums for years I know military history and tatics dude"* Ironic.
Jacob Moore
Rules of engagement and guerrilla wars don't mix well. >WWII >Enemies easily identified >Murder the shit out of them >Run out of soldiers to kill >Firebomb Dresden >Nuke Japan >Lol that was cool do it again vs. >Iraq >must be honorabru soldier and only fire when fired upon, or bring shame to famiry
Blake Richardson
>honorabru soldier >bring shame to famiry Kek
Owen Murphy
>Even op forgot the forgotten war >A war that was only stalemated because it was too soon after WW2 and it had no public support for a full mobilisation
Colton Parker
OP here. No, I didn't forget, because my grandpa was wounded in Korea (1st Cavalry). Truman half-assedly sent men over to die for a tie.
It's simple. There's barely any will for the US soldier to fight in wars unlike the so called enemies. Try to study history from the other point of view for once.
Zachary Morgan
>pre 1917 Banana wars Border war Veracruz Boxer rebellion Spanish American war Philippine American war Samoan civil war Try again kiddo
Ian Morales
Fuck 1st Cav. Fort Hood is a shithole ghetto and the officers let it rot while they get their promotions and circlejerk over their egos.
Joseph Robinson
1. MIC makes more money in conflicts that do not end 2. actual warfare has never been carried out due to political reasons ever since the mid 60s 3. there have been no conflicts successfully sold to the public since Korea to the point where the American public has the desire to support them (this damages the political apparatus supporting the war) 4. Currently it's more advantageous for the west to put areas into conflict than to resolve the conflict
The McDonald’s in Vietnam begs to differ on who won
Thomas Martin
>World police wheresthelittlegirl.webm
Kevin Phillips
because nigs gunna nig (sand, mullato, or otherwise), total subjugation is (((rounded upon))), and ya will to do so is not there, nazis got hanged for suppressing localized resistance aka "partisans".
Julian Sanders
I'd say that's evidence that the US won the Cold War, which isn't in question. Vietnam War was North Vietnamese victory since they took the whole country.
Evan Reyes
Because forever war is more profitable for the (((international bankers))). It also weakens the host so they can move on to the next one before that host becomes fully aware of their kikery.
Aaron Perry
frowned* not rounded wtf
Lucas Hall
Name me a military post 1945 with not a spotty record. There isn't one.
Russians were either bullying impotent rebellious gommie states (Success), Chechnya (failure round 1, success round 2), or Afghanistan (failure). Britain has a good success record in bushfire wars. France has an abysmal record. China has a very limited record with no runaway success story except the Korean push back to the DMZ. India's actually been pretty damn successful surprisingly. Street shitters won every conflict with Pakistan and the victory of 1971 is a fucking clutch victory with few post 1945 comparisons. Pakistan lost basically half its land half its population 1/3rd of the army captive. They just lose in high mountain conflicts with China.
Nobody really has the market cornered on post 1945 messy hand-behind-your back wars or insurgency wars.
Lucas Allen
The military did its job in all of those cases.
Bentley Torres
>But the objective of said buttfucking was to project America's political interests onto the region. They won all the battles, but still lost the war.
Debatable, considering that the USA are still dominating the world on the fields of : - science - economics - military power - cultural influence
Some countries are close second in one or maybe two fields. Still, it has been 73 years since WW2 ended... and the USA are still top dog.
Connor Taylor
>China has a very limited record with no runaway success story except the Korean push back to the DMZ. They got their asses handed to them by the Vietnamese.
