Agreed on the first part but let's not go to 9/11.Originally Posted by William F. Owen
Armies are political instruments. Future conflicts will result from future politics, and nothing else. Resources may be an issue, but there is no evidence that they definitely will be. The same was predicted before 911, and look how wrong that was
We have a very clear guide as to what the future of war looks like and that's 3,000 years of military history. It also is our best guide as to how to fight and win. Call it "stove piped" or "linear" but it works much better than anything else.
Europe knew 30 years of IRA in Ireland, RAF in Germany, Red Brigades in Italy, Action Directe in France, ETA in Spain, CCC in Belgium, Red Resistance Front in the Netherlands and that was the left wing part ..... Respecting the many death which was the result of the madness at 9/11, what is the point you want to make with 9/11 ??
For the last part. The only thing I like to stress is that we have to get a broader view at conflicts, the "hardware" aproach is just a (minor) part of conflicts.
Let us go back to rethink the way we can train ourselves and our troops better than we do now.
And dear Ken and William, I would appreciate it that you do not to lift words out of a sentence to react on.
The whole is more than the sum of its parts.
Like some quote's?? http://thinkexist.com/quotations
“A common danger unites even the bitterest enemies”
“Anyone can become angry - that is easy, but to be angry with the right person at the right time, and for the right purpose and in the right way - that is not within everyone's power and that is not easy.”
“The greatest barrier to success is the fear of failure.”
Ahmed Rashid wrote some fine interesting books and an informative site is http://usacac.army.mil/cac2/cgsc/
Ready for some constructive and additional coments
Bookmarks