That's not an accurate statement.Originally Posted by JMA
Maybe true for the Soviets. They've never been very good at warfare, but the stellar opposite is true of the UK. Has the UK predominantly failed in the post 2001 context? Yes, I think it has, but this is not the historical norm.
The UK is currently going through another "Crimea."
Infinity Journal "I don't care if this works in practice. I want to see it work in theory!"
- The job of the British Army out here is to kill or capture Communist Terrorists in Malaya.
- If we can double the ratio of kills per contact, we will soon put an end to the shooting in Malaya.
Sir Gerald Templer, foreword to the "Conduct of Anti-Terrorist Operations in Malaya," 1958 Edition
Crimea, Khartoum, Boers, Somme, Dardanelles, Dunkirk, Western Desert, Malaya, Dieppe, Arnhem, Suez?
There's a bit more than just Crimea, Basra and Helmand on the list, Wilf!
I heard that...Of course, his real expertise is in the area of sheep and goat husbandry.
Of late, I've also developed a knack for understanding how the locals are able to "push water uphill". It is a remarkable and age old process, yet abuses the land over time.
And I never would have thunk that I would know that.
To the question about Force Recon and Recon Battalion doing that sort of semi- pseudo ops, that's in the movies I'm afraid. There may be some urban recce skills taught out there, but it is impractical to try to employ mirror-image efforts at a large scale. I think we have a hard enough time trying to employ covert camouflague techniques for small recce elements.
And they do this how? I have often thought how a very tall redwood tree "lifts" the water from below ground to the leaves. Easier to be told than to try and figure it out.I heard that...
Of late, I've also developed a knack for understanding how the locals are able to "push water uphill". It is a remarkable and age old process, yet abuses the land over time.
And I never would have thunk that I would know that.
Oh! Oh! Something I can answer... somewhat. This is the danger of allowing engineers access to webboards. I can't answer how local folks would push water uphill.
Trees, I think I can answer. Capillary action. Essentially, if you create enough surface area and thin enough tubes, the water will have a natural tendency to cling to the sides of the tubes. Same principle as to why when you sip soda through a straw, the height of the soda inside the straw can be higher than the level of the soda in the cup, even after you stop sipping.
Additionally, with trees, they also aspirate water through the leaves. This creates a "pull" at the top of the tree (kinda like sucking on the straw). Combine that with capillary action at work inside the tree (and veins inside the tree that branch off and get smaller and smaller as you work your way up) and poof, watered tree. That's the gist of it, anyway.
Anyways... I'll stop playing Mr. Wizard and let you all get back to your regularly scheduled discussion on counterinsurgency type things.
Water Wizard
Ken,
Thanks for the explanation, good to know engineers know their biology too. Now how about the Afghans moving water uphill? No time limit set, just a wave of the wizard's wand
.
davidbfpo
First guess... lots of buckets?
Man that takes me back to biology class 40 years ago. Thanks for the reminder.
A war the UK bungled.
Those were battles or operations that occurred in wars we won. At best they were failed operations. ALL armies have those.Khartoum, Boers, Somme, Dardanelles, Dunkirk, Western Desert, Malaya, Dieppe, Arnhem,
Nothing much wrong with the military conduct of that operation.Suez?
Infinity Journal "I don't care if this works in practice. I want to see it work in theory!"
- The job of the British Army out here is to kill or capture Communist Terrorists in Malaya.
- If we can double the ratio of kills per contact, we will soon put an end to the shooting in Malaya.
Sir Gerald Templer, foreword to the "Conduct of Anti-Terrorist Operations in Malaya," 1958 Edition
Hmm, considering the war goals of September 1939, the UK lost the European WW2 in Jalta 1943 - and that can be attributed to Dunkirk.
With the same forgiving criteria that count WW2 as a UK win, you could also say that Irak was a UK win despite Basra - and the who knows how much the goals in AFG will be redefined...
WW2 was a "UK Win," albeit part of a coalition. All lost territory recovered. Unconditional surrender of the enemy. Yes, the strategic environment changed, but the UK was on the militarily successful side, and in the vast majority of cases UK formations destroyed the enemy formations it faced, both in Europe. Africa and Asia.
Infinity Journal "I don't care if this works in practice. I want to see it work in theory!"
- The job of the British Army out here is to kill or capture Communist Terrorists in Malaya.
- If we can double the ratio of kills per contact, we will soon put an end to the shooting in Malaya.
Sir Gerald Templer, foreword to the "Conduct of Anti-Terrorist Operations in Malaya," 1958 Edition
The Poles beg to differ.
The UK declared war because it had guaranteed Polish sovereignty - a promise broken two weeks later when it didn't declare war on the Soviet Union for its invasion of Eastern Poland. Churchill traded away Polish sovereignty completely to Stalin in iirc Jalta 1943.
The UK had a mission creep away from the original goal and reason of WW2 - and there's a good reason to expect the same kind of "win" in AFG and Iraq. The Crimean War had a similar kind of "win" for the British.
Btw, I personally dislike the inflationary use of "victory" in history books.
How could a nation be a "winner" if it took more damage than it had advantages because of its involvement in a war? Most "victories" in war sound rather like "enemy defeated" to me, not like actual "winning".
Fuchs, its called a Pyrrhic victory
Origin:
A Pyrrhic victory is so called after the Greek king Pyrrhus , who, after suffering heavy losses in defeating the Romans in 279 B.C., said to those sent to congratulate him, "Another such victory over the Romans and we are undone."
Yes and WW1 was such a Pyrrhic victory as well as the Germans and British had ripped the guts out of each other and as if that were not enough they had another go at it in WW2 which totally ripped out what was left out of each other.
A bankrupt Britain then had to borrow from the US to keep solvent (the debt having only been paid off in the last 5 years I think) and had to dismantle her empire post haste whatever the consequences and the end of rationing did not happen until 1954 when meat rationing was finally lifted. So yes some victory that was.
Posting Permissions
Bookmarks