Thread: Chinas warning to US

Originally Posted by DJ Mr. White

I don't know. I see a lot of parallels between Vietnam and Iraq/Afghanistan.

I would love to hear those.

Originally Posted by digital

Issues like this will cost us billions of more dollars. If we did not have 2 wars raging on for the 10 years our country would not be in this deep of a financial whole.

You know why doesn't our country start a task for Miners and Geologists and starting tapping into a resources. If 5 unemployed sob's from Oregon can do it on the Discovery Channel why can we do it as a country?

Really the same ole money arguement? OK if our politicians would work for free we could save millions a year. If they would spend time cutting waste then you would save billions. What ifs and should dos aren't worth shit.

Not sure where you came from or where you were even trying to go with that second part. I guess the appropriate responce would be Where are they going to get the next crew for celebrity rehab?

Originally Posted by DJ Mr. White

Fighting non-traditional, well entrenched military adversaries that have support from local populations? American forces abusing local populations? There are more ones, I'm sure.

Whats a traditional fight? The only thing the 2 really have in common is we fought them and they fought us. After that everything changes the environment, tactics, equipment, and reasons behind the fight. The biggest difference in my opinion is going to be tactics deployed. Vietnam troops went in and called for air strikes. Now the send in air and clean up with troops. The difference saves thousands apon thousands of lives.

Originally Posted by Hitch

I would have to say that DG-USMC loves to argue and likely would not back down from a friendly fist-de-cuffs. In these regards we are, unfortunately similar. We probably also see an enemy to our allies or our way of life in a same light. I believe you misread my opinion at times, but I really do not care to spatter with you because I know what message I am trying to relay.

"Congrats to you and i appreciate their service but how does that change what you said being not only wrong but misleading at best? War has changed greatly since vietnam and no person serving now will thankfully ever see that type of warfare again. "

I believe we still engage in war against various enemies in terms of rifle fire and head shots. Tactical strikes from the air are obviously mo-bettah, however, some things are still done in the dirt/sand, as you well know. Reasons for war involve religion (tied to politics) hence theological reasoning, or lack thereof. If we get into it with China, my guess is that money will be somehow brought up...and rightfully so.

The likelihood of a Normandy-style landing on the beaches of our Pacific coast is not probable. Submarine and other missile tossing, terrorist style bombings in large cites, water supplies, hazardous material locations, power stations, oil refineries, airports, major bridges etc....are more probable, in my opinion.

It is difficult to manage war in this day and age. We do not have a defined, uniformed enemy at this point.

The progression of modern warfare is comparable to this:

In wars (post gun powder) of the past, men/boys stood in lines and shot at each other, repeatedly. The Civil War became more guerrilla in tactics, however, there were still plenty of guys standing in lines shooting at each other, much to their demise. It became intelligent to change things up a bit by The Great War to try and hide in trenches and pop heads as they presented themselves as targets. Moving right along, WWII rendered use of tactics which were not considered so "fair", such as...hey, let's sneak up on our enemy, before they know they are our declared war enemy and blow them to bits while they are relaxing (Pearl Harbor). By now I hope you see where this is going.

My main point is and will remain, that I hope we never have a WWIII, by any definition. Unfortunately, the Quran may hold other plans.

Hitch

PS If it was the Imperialistic remark you disagreed with, I have no response. Imperialism - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Actually i dont like argueing at all. I use to but as i got older i also got calmer. Now i like to discuss thing but on a forum you lack tone and tempermant so things seem more harsh then they are intended to be at times. I actually dont think we are that far apart on our perspectives. The advancements in technolgy have given our troops a much higher rate of survival then we would have dreamed of back then.

I dare to say due to technology we are at our safety point in history while at war. Ironic statement to say the least but it will be a short lived victory as technology advances further. The one thing you can always count on is technology for weapons of death will always advance faster then the technolgy to save lives. The fact that one advances the other is a sick twist of fate in itself.