Quote:
Originally Posted by
Fuchs
You don't seem to get it because of a tiny field of view on this.
If you are talking about the benefits and value of exposing a young platoon commander to combat then yes I am focussing on a very small (but important) aspect of the whole.
Quote:
Sure, once you're in a mess you want to be able to reduce its severity.
The wish for this ability is inferior to the wish for not getting into that mess in the first place, though.
I suggest it is rather the politicians who screw up and start wars and when that happens the military is more or less left to sort out the mess. It is up to the military to prepare itself for this eventuality.
Quote:
For that reason it's a foolish mistake to hope for combat experience. The correct hope is to avoid war.
And there's more than hoping that can be done.
On the contrary I suggest it is foolish for a military not to prepare fully for the day when the politicians land them in a real shooting war. The nation will never forgive the military if after the millions/billions/trillions/zillions spent on it in peacetime they collapse like a wet paper bag when the shooting starts.
If junior officers can be exposed to combat then it is valuable. If officers at every command level can be exposed to combat then it is valuable. All this is preparation of the officer for higher command. If there is no combat situation available then how to simulate it?
Quote:
Your tiny angle of view on a military education topic keeps you from considering that in almost all cases preserving peace is superior to "winning" war.
There are things a soldier can influence or control and there are others over which he has none. I was taught to prepare for the 'worst case scenario'. If we are to be sent to war then the least we can do is give a good account of ourselves.
Quote:
Armed forces of a rationally-led state exist in order to keep that state out of war, not to win wars. Aiming at not getting involved in wars means that the ideal education and experience path for the officer corps cannot lead through wartime experience (save for foolish volunteers who get involved in other's wars).
What you are instead aiming at is a systematically inferior path.
The politicians make all these decisions and not the military. The military tends to be left to pick up the pieces. Would-be aggressors should take one look at the military that should convince them not to try and push their luck.
So when the politicians screw up (which is certain) then you need your military to have a deterrent effect ;)
http://i193.photobucket.com/albums/z...omingSmall.jpg