LOL! The US already lost the war!

[Coolville]

LOL! I bet you yanks didn't hear about this on your propaganda TV!

Wake-up call
by Julian Borger writing in The Guardian today.
Read the whole article here

If the US and Iraq do go to war, there can only be one winner, can't there? Maybe not. This summer, in a huge rehearsal of just such a conflict - and with retired Lieutenant General Paul Van Riper playing Saddam - the US lost. Julian Borger asks the former marine how he did it.

At the height of the summer, as talk of invading Iraq built in Washington like a dark, billowing storm, the US armed forces staged a rehearsal using over 13,000 troops, countless computers and $250m. Officially, America won and a rogue state was liberated from an evil dictator.

What really happened is quite another story, one that has set alarm bells ringing throughout America's defence establishment and raised questions over the US military's readiness for an Iraqi invasion. In fact, this war game was won by Saddam Hussein, or at least by the retired marine playing the Iraqi dictator's part, Lieutenant General Paul Van Riper.

In the first few days of the exercise, using surprise and unorthodox tactics, the wily 64-year-old Vietnam veteran sank most of the US expeditionary fleet in the Persian Gulf, bringing the US assault to a halt.

What happened next will be familiar to anyone who ever played soldiers in the playground. Faced with an abrupt and embarrassing end to the most expensive and sophisticated military exercise in US history, the Pentagon top brass simply pretended the whole thing had not happened. They ordered their dead troops back to life and "refloated" the sunken fleet. Then they instructed the enemy forces to look the other way as their marines performed amphibious landings. Eventually, Van Riper got so fed up with all this cheating that he refused to play any more. Instead, he sat on the sidelines making abrasive remarks until the three-week war game - grandiosely entitled Millennium Challenge - staggered to a star-spangled conclusion on August 15, with a US "victory".

Read the whole article here

 

[Coolville]

I knew kids who played that way back in school. They all ended up as insurance salesmen or junkies. Or both.

 

[p_p_man]

LOL! I bet you yanks didn't hear about this on your propaganda TV!

I find that completely sick. On the verge of committing young men and women to the horrors of war the Americans even have to cheat at finding out whether their invasion plans will work or not.

Sick...

ppman

 

[red_rose]

We keep talking about it - and the whole fucking world knows we're thinking of attacking. If I were Iraq/Saddam, I'd be ready to friggin' pounce the moment it happened.

We've set ourselves a booby trap, if you ask me. We'd be pretty stupid to walk right into it.

 

[DeityMun]

I think if anyone thinks we're just going to start putting people on the ground in Iraq, you need to study the military a bit better. Afganistan is a good example.

 

[Problem Child]

Coolville-

This is good spin by the Guardian, but what does it really prove? It proves that in a theoretical setting, a wily old retired Marine General figured out a way that the Iraqis, in theory, could possibly hurt an attacking force.

What it proves is this, among other things-

Military exercises are tools for learning. They are training aids. General Van Riper figured out what his strengths were and found a weakness in his enemy. Good for him. Do you think what he did was just ignored? Of course not. As General Pace said, what were they supposed to do, just fold up the exercise after Van Riper surprised them? you don't just call off a $250 million exercise that probably took months to plan because one very good old general outwitted the "good guys".

Down in the National Training Center in the mojave desert, the "good guys" rarely win. That's because it's a theoretical battle, and the odds are actually stacked against the U.S. force to make the training harder and more realistic. That's how you get good enough to take people apart like we have been in the last three or four wars we've fought.

In this theoretical exercise, a small fleet of Iraqi boats defeat the U.S. Navy. If this is so easy, why didn't they do it during the last gulf war. We had ships in the Persian gulf...lots of them. Why weren't any sunk? Maybe it's easier to do in a training exercise than in real life. Ya think?

As far as our propaganda TV goes, do you think the military might have kept this quiet so as not to give the Iraqis any bright ideas? It's not real smart to put a possible weakness in your military on CNN for everyone to see. I think a better thing to do might be to study the problem and try to come up with a plan to fix it.

Red Rose, the Iraqis knew we were coming to kick their asses three or four months before we actually did it last time, and we still won fairly easily.

Deitymun, we had 400,000 troops on the ground last time, remember?

 

[Coolville]

As far as our propaganda TV goes, do you think the military might have kept this quiet so as not to give the Iraqis any bright ideas? It's not real smart to put a possible weakness in your military on CNN for everyone to see. I think a better thing to do might be to study the problem and try to come up with a plan to fix it.

Hey. It amused me. Nothing more than that. Especially with all the redneck, yahoo!, let's go kick some butt! noise pollution in the air at the moment.

and it was the General who blew the whistle out of disgust. As the man said:
"Nothing was learned from this," he says. "A culture not willing to think hard and test itself does not augur well for the future." The exercise, he says, was rigged almost from the outset.

As for keeping it quiet, nobody disclosed HOW he nailed them. That would be dumb. But such a story wouldn't fly in the States at the moment given the blind patriotism.

That's why the gen. went to the Guardian.

 

[weed]

It would be kind of funny that proponents of war think we're just going to get in there and kick butt if the reality of it weren't so sad. I may not be a history buff but I don't recall any American history of quick effective military action. Would that be Afghanistan? Or Viet Nam? Or WWII? Oh, yeah, that bomb was quick and effective. Maybe Saddam will use that tactic also.

Just how are wins and losses tallied? Deaths? Outcomes?

Just what did we win in the Gulf War if here we are again?

 

[Problem Child]

Hey. It amused me. Nothing more than that. Especially with all the redneck, yahoo!, let's go kick some butt! noise pollution in the air at the moment.

and it was the General who blew the whistle out of disgust. As the man said:
"Nothing was learned from this," he says. "A culture not willing to think hard and test itself does not augur well for the future." The exercise, he says, was rigged almost from the outset.

As for keeping it quiet, nobody disclosed HOW he nailed them. That would be dumb. But such a story wouldn't fly in the States at the moment given the blind patriotism.

That's why the gen. went to the Guardian.

You know, you over "there" like to give us a lot of shit for being so jingoistic, but sometimes I think you guys are the ones that need to wake up. I hear a lot of discussion and debate about a possible war over here. It's getting louder and louder, and it's nearly impossible to turn on the TV without hearing somebody asking the question "Where's the proof? Where is the national interest for invading Iraq?" We're not all marching in lockstep with Dubya over here, as much as you Euros would like to believe. I know that might be disappointing to you, but it's the truth. The blind patriotism you're talking about just isn't there. People in this country don't really want to go back into Iraq unless there is a damn good reason.

As I said, I applaud the general for outsmarting his competition. He's retired, so he can speak his mind. Unfortunately his competition seems to still be in uniform and as such cannot speak freely. I'd like to hear their side of the story. And as a matter of fact, they did give a thumbnail sketch of how he beat them in the article.

As far as training goes, one time in Germany my platoon took out a company of Canadian armor by sneaking in to their camp one night and stealing their bright yellow ID signs and putting them on our tanks. The umpire said it was a brilliant move, and we were awarded the victory. It showed creativity and intelligence, he said. I really doubt if it would have worked in live combat, though.

 

[Coolville]

We're not all marching in lockstep with Dubya over here, as much as you Euros would like to believe. I know that might be disappointing to you, but it's the truth. The blind patriotism you're talking about just isn't there. People in this country don't really want to go back into Iraq unless there is a damn good reason.

Don't worry, Problem Child, I am well aware of the fact that many Americans question the attack or object to it outright. I have many American friends who are opposed.

Nevertheless, there is a lot of rhetoric in the air, lots on this site and lots in the American media. And most of it is one-sided, toeing the line rhetoric. I take issue with this one-sided journalism and call it propaganda outright.

A journalist fired for suggesting that the highjackers were courageous? Poor guy.

All this hype in your media reminds me of Hearst's singlehanded attempts to start the Spanish war. As he said to his photographers, "You find me the pictures and I'll find you the war".

On another note, your tactics in Germany were cool!

 

[AngelAmy]

Actually, that news is a month old

FYI, I read story in the paper about a month ago (hmm, perhaps the free press does actually work over here . . .). I was disheartened then, as I am now. But, as someone with an interest in both international and national news, I have discovered that there are dishonest people in positions of power everywhere. What is unique about free countries is that these immoralities are more likely to be revealed through a system of checks and balances, which consists most notably of the existance of a free press and a well-educated populace.

Coolville, I must question YOUR morality, as most people react with horror at the discovery of such gross dishonesty. Instead, you react with amusement. In this instance of dishonesty, soldiers could potentially die due to lack of proper preparation, and you laugh? Your inhumanity makes me despair . . .

 

[Coolville]

Re: Actually, that news is a month old

Coolville, I must question YOUR morality...

Feel free to question away. If you had read the many other threads on this topic, I try to draw peoples attention to the thousands of civilians in Afganistan (over 4000 now) and Iraq (and elsewhere) which don't see to figure into all the blind patriotic rhetoric from many on this site.

Having recently returned from Afghanistan where I was filming a documentary (and having worked in war zones as a journalist) I am all too aware of the horrors of military combat, 'friendly' fire and the tragedies that follow.

 

[AngelAmy]

"LOL! I bet you yanks didn't hear about this on your propaganda TV!"

If you have witnessed such horrors, why the laughter?

Also, why attack me because I may not be as well-versed in the world of Literotica's message boards as you? I am well-educated in a myriad of revelent topics, which I am confident allows me to comment on this particular subject. Just because I may be unfamilar with YOUR particular story does not relegate me to silence . . .

FYI--I do hope you do not take this personally, as it is your ideas I question, not you as a person.

 

[Coolville]

"LOL! I bet you yanks didn't hear about this on your propaganda TV!"

If you have witnessed such horrors, why the laughter?

Also, why attack me because I may not be as well-versed in the world of Literotica's message boards as you? I am well-educated in a myriad of revelent topics, which I am confident allows me to comment on this particular subject. Just because I may be unfamilar with YOUR particular story does not relegate me to silence . . .

FYI--I do hope you do not take this personally, as it is your ideas I question, not you as a person.

HEY! Hang on! I didn't attack you Amy!
Feel free to question away. If you had read the many other threads on this topic...

The above can be interpreted in different ways. I didn't mean it to sound agressive. It is merely a statement and not a reflection on your intelligence. I don't even know you. I was filling you in.

That's it.

and the LOL... was directed at Rhett Oric and his inbred family, of whom most live on this board.

 

[JazzManJim]

Just what did we win in the Gulf War if here we are again?

History, folks. Read your frigging history.

The entire goal of the Gulf War Campaign was to drive Iraq's invading army out of Kuwait and return that country to its people.

That was what the UN mandated and we agreed to hold to that mandate and the resolutions the UN set. Period.

Any talk of "Why are we here again" can be answered simply by saying "Because the UN put us here". There were vociferous arguments in front of the UN from the United States and Britain to expand the mandate to include toppling Hussein and allowing the Kurds and the oppressed Iraqi people to form their own democratic government, but the UN would hear nothing of it.

In the time between then and now, Hussein killed over 182, 0000 Kurds in Northern and Southern Iraq forcing the need for constantly-patrolled no-fly zones. In that slaughter, he entirely destroyed 4000 out of 4500 Kurdish villages and used chemical and biological weapons against them over 250 times.

Very few people have bothered to ask the Iraqi people whether or not they're happy with Hussein being there. They're not, by the way. That's what's come out every time someone who has been living any time there leaves the country. The people are miserable and oppressed beyond anything you could imagine.

In the meantime the Kurds are practically begging us to come in and liberate them entirely. Think they can't run a government? In the time since they were given limited automony (thanks to US warplanes), even under UN sanctions, they turned a land razed by the Stalin wannabe into the most prosperous province in all of Iraq. Their self-rule government is as stable as any government in the region and they're ready to take a larger role, working with other groups in the country to actually govern all of Iraq democratically. Those naysayers who project that the US will be in Iraq for a decade or better underestimate the Iraqi people's desire for change or their intelligence and resourcefulness. They believe that the people themselves will actually stand up for and support Hussein. They weren't any great fans of his back in 1991, I doubt they will be now.

Of course, the UN didn't see the need to have Hussein removed back then, and they still don't. I find their call for human rights in other parts of the world laughable in the face of their inaction in Iraq. Hypocrites, every one of them.

Why are the Arab states so against this? That's pretty simple. They don't want another stable democratic government in the region. After all, if their people see that Arabs can operate a democracy and enjoy freedom and liberty, then maybe they'll want the same thing. Maybe they'll decide that they don't want to settle for oppression and brutality as the default living condition. Maybe they'll decide that their current monarchs shouldn't be there anymore. Of course that's their only worry. Hussein hasn't threatened to release biological and chemical weapons on their people in their country. He hasn't promised and given assistance to those who have declared war on their country and sworn themselves to its destruction.

It's pretty easy to let little things like genocide go when it doesn't really affect you, though, I suppose.

 

[REDWAVE]

My wish

I wish this coming war with Iraq would be fought as a computer simulation and war game ONLY, and no one actually die.

 

[mritsme]

THE DAILY TELEGRAPH’S front page report said Thursday’s air strike on Iraq appeared to be “a prelude to the type of special forces operation that would have to begin weeks before a possible American-led war.”
It said 100 U.S. and British warplanes had taken part in the raid Thursday on an Iraqi command and control center in what it said was a first strike in western Iraq and the largest in four years. The British Broadcasting Corp. aired a similar report.
The British Ministry of Defense declined to comment on numbers, but said the raid was part of the normal enforcement of the southern “no fly” zone, one of two zones policed by Britain and the United States since the 1991 Gulf War.
Although it was the second such strike in six days, a spokeswoman said there was no sign of an increase in the tempo either of allied operations or Iraqi activity on the ground.
However, sources interviewed by the British media said the size and location of the strike were significant — in areas where the Iraqis could position Scud missiles capable of hitting Israel as retaliation for a U.S. invasion

 

[Dixon Carter Lee]

You're latching onto a War Game for your rhetoric? Pu-leez.

Nicely expressed REDWAVE.

 

[Mischka]

As for keeping it quiet, nobody disclosed HOW he nailed them. That would be dumb. But such a story wouldn't fly in the States at the moment given the blind patriotism.

I heard about this scenario last month on NPR (National Public Radio). They detailed the General's tactics and why the sunken ships and dead soldiers were resurrected for the next round. It struck me as a balanced report.

 

[JazzManJim]

But such a story wouldn't fly in the States at the moment given the blind patriotism.

And of course with all the blind patriotism, the LA Times and NY Times would never print battle plans for Iraq leaked from the Pentagon either, I know.

No wait. They did.

Silly me.

 

[sufisaint]

Simulations mean absolutely nothing when bullets are whizing by your head and bombs are falling from what was an empty sky just minutes ago...it still comes down to a soldiers courage and their commanders intelligence....we have seen Iraqi soldiers in action already...however its a known fact we cannot leave a fleet hanging out there forever like before.....thats why we forgave Turkey's debts, we have the ability to launch strikes whenever...the question is when......

 

[SINthysist]

"We keep talking about it - and the whole fucking world knows we're thinking of attacking. If I were Iraq/Saddam, I'd be ready to friggin' pounce the moment it happened. " Red Rose


No that is not how psych war works. You see Saddam is an idiot and our generals are smart. You see Saddam is on war footing now, ready for imminent invasion, while our generals are building up, AND LETTING THE IRAQI's see it! They still remember the war. Right now moral will be bad in their ranks. The longer this draws on, the worse it will get. When the first bombs hit, well, Iraqi soldiers will once again be removing their boots en masse...

 

[weed]

History, folks. Read your frigging history.

The entire goal of the Gulf War Campaign was to drive Iraq's invading army out of Kuwait and return that country to its people.

That was what the UN mandated and we agreed to hold to that mandate and the resolutions the UN set. Period.

Any talk of "Why are we here again" can be answered simply by saying "Because the UN put us here". There were vociferous arguments in front of the UN from the United States and Britain to expand the mandate to include toppling Hussein and allowing the Kurds and the oppressed Iraqi people to form their own democratic government, but the UN would hear nothing of it.

In the time between then and now, Hussein killed over 182, 0000 Kurds in Northern and Southern Iraq forcing the need for constantly-patrolled no-fly zones. In that slaughter, he entirely destroyed 4000 out of 4500 Kurdish villages and used chemical and biological weapons against them over 250 times.

So, the bottom line is his regime has continued to kill even though we met our goal? So here we are again! Even with our patrols in place!

You may say we needed to go further but we had already knocked out 100,000 of their troops and added thousands of civilian casualties to the totals not to mention the suffering and loss of innocent life that continued after the war. Not to mention our troops who suffered from the mysterious Gulf War Syndrome.

Just how far do we have to go to "win"? To not be where we are now? If we want to blame it on Saddam as an evil individual then I say wipe him out and him alone. If that's not possible don't create more unrest and destruction that doesn't serve any longterm benefit.

You can blame it on the UN but I for one am glad there is some entity out there putting some restraints on our American muscle.

 

[weed]

Re: My wish

I wish this coming war with Iraq would be fought as a computer simulation and war game ONLY, and no one actually die.

Some day maybe power games will be played as they should truly be played.

 

[SINthysist]

I remember a SciFi short story. Two platoons, trained only for war, let loose in a contained battlefield to resolve a dispute. Very civilized, eh?