Can we finally admit that our military isn't that good?

There was a time in the not so distant past when a military was judged by its ability to win wars and defeat enemies. In fact, all throughout history, until very recently, that was the only measure of a military.
During most of history, a general who lost the war then had his head removed from his shoulders.

We are in a Brave New World these days. Our military no longer needs to win wars and defeat enemies to be worshiped. Losing generals, instead of being beheaded, get paid enormous amounts of money to spout nonsense on TV.
Unlike you and I, the military doesn't have to succeed at its job, or even display basic competence.
Just look at its recent 16-year record in Afghanistan.

VOA: Pentagon Under Fire As Mattis Admits U.S. Is 'Not Winning' War In Afghanistan
NBC: Trump Says U.S. 'Losing' Afghan War in Tense Meeting With Generals
PopMech: We're Losing Afghanistan By Every Metric That Matters
aljazeera: Opium production in Afghanistan reaches record high
Newsweek: The U.S. Is Losing Badly in Afghanistan, but the Trump Administration Is Telling Americans Less

Now some may point out that we could "win" the war by simply killing everything that moves from the air, and that we don't do it because we are the "good guys". Horsesh*t.
My response remains the same:

If you have to resort to genocide to win the war, then you aren't very good at war.
Plus, if you literally destroy everything then you haven't left anything to win. You just prevented the other guy from winning.

It isn't just Afghanistan. Look at Syria.

SYRIA was the last outpost of Communist Russia’s imperial dreams.
President Vladimir Putin did not want to let it go.
Now, according to an assessment published in the professional journal of the US Army, the Military Review, he’s won.
By direct implication, this implies a serious strategic setback for the United States...
“Russia has only been directly involved in this conflict since September 2015, but its intervention has radically changed the war’s outcome,” the US Army publication states. “The natural question is whether Russia has, in fact, won a victory.”
“Russia has become a potential powerbroker, and perhaps a balancer against US influence, even if it did not embark on the Syrian campaign with those goals in mind,” the Army press article states.

We staked our local alliance on the Syrian Kurds, but now the Kurds are being crushed by Turkey, which leaves us with nothing but unwelcome, insecure bases in an unstable country.
That doesn't look like victory.

And then there is Iraq. We've lost twice in Iraq.
First in 2003-2011.

The U.S. lost that war by any reasonable measure in that it threw away thousands of American lives and more than a hundred thousand Iraqi lives for the sake of creating a wrecked, impoverished country ruled by sectarian thugs.

That's one way of measuring how we lost, but a more clear measurement is in the simple fact that the other guys were still shooting at us while we withdrew.

The second time for losing in Iraq is still in our future.

The US-led global coalition placed the defeat of IS at its heart. The group's degradation and destruction was its sole objective. But this monomania has created its own problems.
Most obviously, it has meant that the capture of territory was placed above finding a political settlement that would diminish IS’ ideological influence or dismantling the group’s core infrastructure, cells from which were able to mount raids in Kirkuk years after that city’s liberation.
The Raqqa and Mosul campaigns were undertaken rapidly, with dire consequences for the safety of the civilian population. The negative effects of this action went beyond poor PR: it also meant that the global coalition frequently failed to deal satisfactorily with issues that emerged among “partner forces”...
American policy, which was always in essence a quick fix, may have led to quick victories in Iraq and the retreat of the black standard in Syria. But these victories were superficial. The situation is hardly fixed, and the threat from IS – insurgent and now resurgent – remains.

This essay is in no way a negative judgement on the people in our military - with the exception of the incompetents on top.
What this essay is is an indictment of our leaders, our political leaders specifically.
The premise is "war is the continuation of politics by other means."
If we are constantly at war, and we consistently fail at war, then our political leaders must totally suck at politics and our military leaders don't have the courage to do what is right.

We are losing the war in Iraq for the same reason we lost the war in Vietnam: we are fighting one war, while the insurgents fight another. In both campaigns, we understood neither our enemy nor our friends.
Share
up
0 users have voted.

Comments

orlbucfan's picture

another corrupt, incompetent American Craporate interest. The more coin it inhales, the worse it's run. Sound familiar? Rec'd!!

up
0 users have voted.

Inner and Outer Space: the Final Frontiers.

@orlbucfan

as opposed to actually winning wars--is the whole point.

That is, it isn't about winning wars. Rather it's about siphoning off vast amounts of national resources into the war machine in order to make a relatively small group of its employees and contractors and captured politicians wealthy and powerful at everybody else's expense.

Perhaps it is also about using the Pentagon as a "make work" program for the American population.

Assuming that Putin's presentation of his new weapon systems are not just propaganda, and he does in fact have working, effective "game changing" weapons such as the ones he has recently advertised, isn't it amazing that Russia has been able to produce such weapons at a mere fraction of the cost that the United States spends on its military budget? How are the Russians able to be so innovative, efficient, and effective, while the American MIC BURNS through resources?

For anyone even vaguely familiar, do some research on the F35 fighter program, which is now expected to cost $1.5 trillion, and yet still cannot do what it was designed to do. Everything I've read about it describes it as a high-priced "piece of junk," and a boondoggle. Sounds to me like Lockheed-Martin has had quite the "win," as have the congressional districts where its various parts and components have been subcontracted. (Perhaps for the pilots that may have to fly such planes in actual combat situations, however, not so much.)

up
0 users have voted.

@SoylentGreenisPeople But the American tax payer. I read one story about Iraq where the Pentagon decided to get rid of their full time employee oil buyers for the troops. Pentagon hired some Kuwaitee outfit which proceeded to buy more expense gas than the buyers.

up
0 users have voted.
Meteor Man's picture

@SoylentGreenisPeople

How are the Russians able to be so innovative, efficient, and effective, while the American MIC BURNS through resources?

The Russian MIC is not nearly as corrupt as America's and their politicians are not as depraved and insane. Russia will never forget WWII and the high cost of military "victory".

up
0 users have voted.

"They'll say we're disturbing the peace, but there is no peace. What really bothers them is that we are disturbing the war." Howard Zinn

thanatokephaloides's picture

@SoylentGreenisPeople

So, maybe the MIC "winning" money-- as opposed to actually winning wars--is the whole point.

That is, it isn't about winning wars. Rather it's about siphoning off vast amounts of national resources into the war machine in order to make a relatively small group of its employees and contractors and captured politicians wealthy and powerful at everybody else's expense.

Dingdingdingdingding!! That user gets a Marijuana!

(I live in Colorado, I can say that!)

Wink

up
0 users have voted.

"US govt/military = bad. Russian govt/military = bad. Any politician wanting power = bad. Anyone wielding power = bad." --Shahryar

"All power corrupts absolutely!" -- thanatokephaloides

Bollox Ref's picture

to refight a 'conventional' war (see WWII), but the world doesn't work that way any more.

Tanks, aircraft carriers and F-35's can't do much when it comes to IED builders.

up
0 users have voted.

Gëzuar!!
from a reasonably stable genius.

Lenzabi's picture

Yeah our military is not needing to win wars, just test what the MIC makes so that they can sell the weapons used and live demonstrations in action that our Military is made to use as they also simply rob places of resources for the Plutocrats.

up
0 users have voted.

So long, and thanks for all the fish

snoopydawg's picture

Hmm? Aren't we using private terrorist organizations instead of sending our boys and girls into harm's way? /s

The purpose of our wars is to transfer our money to the defense industry. The longer the war the more money that flows into their pockets. War is a $2 billion dollar a day scam. And to remove the leaders who won't allow our "special interests"to have access to their resources.

Imagine if that $2,000,000,000/day was being spent on this country instead.

up
0 users have voted.

Which AIPAC/MIC/pharma/bank bought politician are you going to vote for? Don’t be surprised when nothing changes.

earthling1's picture

these military leaders would be lined up in front of a wall.
A premptive strike should be considered a military option.
We live in interesting times, eh?

up
0 users have voted.

Neither Russia nor China is our enemy.
Neither Iran nor Venezuela are threatening America.
Cuba is a dead horse, stop beating it.

Pricknick's picture

@earthling1
"We have to look forward"

up
0 users have voted.

Regardless of the path in life I chose, I realize it's always forward, never straight.

snoopydawg's picture

@Pricknick

IMG_0864_3.JPG

up
0 users have voted.

Which AIPAC/MIC/pharma/bank bought politician are you going to vote for? Don’t be surprised when nothing changes.

earthling1's picture

@Pricknick
They do it to us.

up
0 users have voted.

Neither Russia nor China is our enemy.
Neither Iran nor Venezuela are threatening America.
Cuba is a dead horse, stop beating it.

This is the scary part. During the election it was clear to me that Hillary wanted to go bear hunting--and now Trump is looking to go dragon hunting. And now May is trying to be some modern day Churchill slaming the Russians.

The neocon deep state seems to be itching for a fight with Russia. One military analyst said that the US and NATO overwhelm Russia with sheer number of weapons but that Russian weapons are superior to Westen weapons systems.

The Nazis built over engineered tanks while the Russians built the T-34 which military experts on the History channel declared thee most event turning tank in modern warfare. The US builds super high tech missile destroyers under a system called Aegis--TV recuritment ads mention it. Sources tell of one of those destroyers enterining the Black Sea during the take over of Crimea. Two Russian jets approached the destroyer and apparently totally knocked out their entire electrical/Aegis computer systems using electronic countermeasures. The destroyer was dead in the water without any ability to protect itself.

We can't pacify third world countries.

up
0 users have voted.
Meteor Man's picture

@MrWebster

We can't pacify third world countries.

Following this would stop most every war we are engaged in:

1) Is a vital national security interest threatened?

2) Do we have a clear attainable objective?

3) Have the risks and costs been fully and frankly analyzed?

4) Have all other non-violent policy means been fully exhausted?

5) Is there a plausible exit strategy to avoid endless entanglement?

6) Have the consequences of our action been fully considered?

7) Is the action supported by the American people?

8) Do we have genuine broad international support?

Not having a "clear attainable objective" and a "plausible exit strategy to avoid endless entanglement" eliminates every single current war.

The Powell Doctrine

up
0 users have voted.

"They'll say we're disturbing the peace, but there is no peace. What really bothers them is that we are disturbing the war." Howard Zinn

ggersh's picture

etc.etc.etc. would make us much safer than any/everything
our vaunted military is doing. Charity is meant to start at
home.

up
0 users have voted.

I never knew that the term "Never Again" only pertained to
those born Jewish

"Antisemite used to be someone who didn't like Jews
now it's someone who Jews don't like"

Heard from Margaret Kimberley

CB's picture

Unbridgeable Gap: Who We Were and Who We Thought We Were

Americans, and their soldiers, were led to believe they fought for democracy and freedom these past 17 years; the truth was far murkier.
...
In July 2001, while my high school friends partied during the summer before college, I found myself at Cadet Basic Training – "Beast Barracks," as we called – a new officer candidate at the U.S. Military Academy at West Point. Hating it from the start, I wanted out, but, well, quitting wasn’t an option. Four years later, I was one of 911 cadets who graduated – Time magazine profiled us as the "Class of 9/11" – and commissioned in the US Army on May 28, 2005. Some 18 months later, I arrived in Baghdad.
...
The intervening 17 years have been a blur: training, deployment, promotions, more training, another deployment. It’s been a long, emotional path from enthusiasm, to belief, to doubt, to dissent. Reflecting, now, on my wars – Afghanistan and Iraq – and on my country’s other conflicts – Libya, Syria, Yemen, etc. – is both difficult and cathartic. What’s been most disturbing is discovering the gap between who we, the vets and this whole nation, thought we were, and, in reality, who we actually were.

And, in each war, in every case, there’s been a tremendous chasm between the comforting fables we’re told to believe, and the reality of the American military’s role in the Greater Middle East.

*Afghanistan seemed the most defensible invasion. Osama bin Laden and Al Qaeda were there, they’d planned the broad contours of the 9/11 attacks in that landlocked, barren shithole (to borrow a cheeky phrase from our current commander-in-chief). We, the soldiers and the American citizenry, were told to kick ass, take vengeance, and, in the process, to bring democracy, gender equality, and basic modernity to Kabul and Kandahar.

In reality, bin Laden escaped, Al Qaeda fighters died or fled, and counter-terror quickly morphed into armed nation-building....
...
*Iraq, we were told, had WMDs, had colluded with Al Qaeda, and that Saddam Hussein was a loose cannon who had to be stopped…like now! Once there, on the ground, the U.S. military had to stay indefinitely, to "fight them over there," so that we didn’t have to "fight them here at home." It was a farce, a fiasco. Then, we were told, we had to reengage, keep fighting (we still are) to vanquish the ISIS menace.

In reality, it was all so much BS. The intelligence was wrong, potentially fabricated, and Saddam, in truth, was a tightly caged animal unable to menace his neighbors....
...
*Libya was a supposedly "humanitarian" intervention, unleashed by a Nobel Peace Prize recipient, a "liberal" president. We had an R2P – a responsibility to protect – rebels who’d otherwise be slaughtered by their brutal dictator, "Mad Dog" Gadhafi. It’d be short, it’d be neat, and the U.S. military could do much good with little exertion.

In reality, the U.S. and its NATO allies took it a step further. The R2P morphed into all out regime change, and – without any real plan for the day after Gadhafi was brutally murdered – Libya descended into chaos....
*In Yemen, we were told the Houthi rebels were an Iranian front. We had to back our "allies," the Saudis, in their terror bombing campaign. Otherwise Iran would win! It was really the Houthis who denied the civilian populace access to humanitarian assistance. Besides, this was a Saudi war, and the U.S. would take a back seat.

In reality, the Houthis weren’t Iranian stooges; that was an exaggeration. The official toll is 10,000 dead civilians, though most counts stopped in 2016. Iona Craig, an investigative journalist and Yemen specialist, recently told me that 50,000 is a more likely figure....
...
As a lowly, ground-pounding, soldier, I’ve been an embattled police officer of sorts, doing the bidding of Iran, Saudi Arabia, Israel, or their associated proxies across the region. Never, in any tangible sense, did we act in vital American interests or make the world a safer place.

In that broader, global sense, we were told the U.S. was a force for good, an “indispensable nation,” a bringer of liberty. In reality, we were a counterproductive force for chaos, the armed wing of an increasing rogue, though ostensibly democratic, regime in Washington.

And me, well, I survived, and tried to get as many of those around me, those in my charge, home safe. At that I failed. And so did America.

up
0 users have voted.
snoopydawg's picture

@CB

to others who are thinking of joining the military. On top of that he can pass out Smedley's book.

The "we have to fight them over there so we don't have to fight them here" is still being said. Military worship is too strong in this country. I wish I knew how to wake people up and get them to see the truth about how it's this country that is the biggest threat to peace. Many people have said that.

up
0 users have voted.

Which AIPAC/MIC/pharma/bank bought politician are you going to vote for? Don’t be surprised when nothing changes.

Meteor Man's picture

What this essay is is an indictment of our leaders, our political leaders specifically.
The premise is "war is the continuation of politics by other means."

The sorriest bunch of bloodthirsty sociopaths in history.

What was supposed to be a political check on military adventurism has turned into the motivation for neverending war. The militaristic mindset of our Neoliberal/Neoconservative military consensus has propelled us into unnecessary and unwinnable wars without end.

It is impossible to wage a military war against an ideology. The political glorification of war by politicians and the media will lead to the downfall and destruction of the American Empire. A nuclear war, in pursuit of political dominance, will make our planet uninhabitable and could lead to the extinction of human life.

up
0 users have voted.

"They'll say we're disturbing the peace, but there is no peace. What really bothers them is that we are disturbing the war." Howard Zinn

Pricknick's picture

@Meteor Man

could lead to the extinction of human life.

it will happen regardless of weapons.

up
0 users have voted.

Regardless of the path in life I chose, I realize it's always forward, never straight.

Yes, but no military is, or had ever been, good enough to deliver victory in the various foolish wars our political system has ordered the military to fight.

up
0 users have voted.
Wink's picture

that if Russia knew what a sorry piece of crap our vehicles and equipment were they'd be storming over their Berlin Wall to stomp our ass so fast we'd barely be able to get breakfast down. This, I thought to myself, is the U.S. Army? "Well, no," my platoon Sgt. said, "the Real U.S. Army is in Vietnam. This is the second team." Turns out the first team had crap to work with too. Not that they would have won with better crap. They wouldn't have. That war, like all "wars" since, was designed to lose. There's no money in winning. Catch-22 had it right. If you can't make a buck in war how you ever gonna make a buck in peace time? Not that we've ever had much, but...

up
0 users have voted.

the little things you can do are more valuable than the giant things you can't! - @thanatokephaloides. On Twitter @wink1radio. (-2.1) All about building progressive media.

what happens when you run an army the you run a (corporate) business.

up
0 users have voted.

probably has little-to-no truth in it. Seriously doubt the majority of US taxpayers mentally support the idea of endless wars. Although many are led to believe in the military solutions the pentagonians espouse, far more would see those resources remain within the nation.

up
0 users have voted.

The US hasn't won a war since WWII.

up
0 users have voted.
thanatokephaloides's picture

@coolepairc

As a British friend is wont to remind me...The US hasn't won a war since WWII.

Neither have the British. (In nearly all cases, they're the same wars. And if the Falklands/Malvinas count as a win, so does Grenada.)

up
0 users have voted.

"US govt/military = bad. Russian govt/military = bad. Any politician wanting power = bad. Anyone wielding power = bad." --Shahryar

"All power corrupts absolutely!" -- thanatokephaloides

Daenerys's picture

I was born in 1982; I was 18 when 9/11 happened, I will be 36 this year. I'm pretty sure it's more than 50% for me.

up
0 users have voted.

This shit is bananas.