How costly were these Post WW2 military mistakes
       |           

Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
Did you miss your activation email?
May 07, 2024, 06:36:01 AM
News: Election Simulator 2.0 Released. Senate/Gubernatorial maps, proportional electoral votes, and more - Read more

  Talk Elections
  General Discussion
  History (Moderator: Southern Senator North Carolina Yankee)
  How costly were these Post WW2 military mistakes
« previous next »
Pages: [1]
Author Topic: How costly were these Post WW2 military mistakes  (Read 1415 times)
OSR stands with Israel
Computer89
Atlas Legend
*****
Posts: 44,886


Political Matrix
E: 3.42, S: 2.61

P P P

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« on: March 24, 2015, 07:11:18 PM »
« edited: March 24, 2015, 07:23:27 PM by Computer09 »

Korean War: MacArthur tells that China is next after North Korea

How costly: Causes China to intervene which stops the UN from able to make the entire Korean peninsula anti communist

Vietnam War: US doenst invade North Vietnam after stopping the  Tet offensive

How costly: Could have ended the war in 1968 instead of 1973
 
Iran Iraq War: Saddam tries to win the war through attrition rather then use Blitzkrieg early  in the war to win

How costly: Causes 7 years more of war which ended in a stalemate instead of ending with a Decisive Iraqi victory in 1981 or 1982

Soviet War in Afghanistan: Not sending more troops to pacify the place after their invasion

How costly: No difference

Afghanistan War: Not pursuing Osama Bin Ladin and the tailban at tora bora letting them escape to Pakistan

How costly: Lets the Tailban and terrorists regroup and form an insurgency by 2005-2006, and Osama remains alive until 2011

Iraq War: Disbanding Iraq military

How costly: Destabilizes Iraq which forces US troops stay to pacify the place instead of able to leave Iraq by 2004 or 2005, and lead to the rise of ISIS
Logged
dead0man
Atlas Legend
*****
Posts: 46,425
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #1 on: March 27, 2015, 06:31:39 AM »

China was coming in no matter what MacArhur said or didn't say.

Saddam's initial plan certainly wasn't attrition, it just ended up that way when he was reminded that Arab's can't win wars.  Plus several year old US gear is better than brand new Soviet gear.  Saddam should have had an easy win, what with the Soviet style purges of the Iranian military before the war and Iran having no important allies, yet they still suck.

I agree with you on Gulf War II, disbanding the Iraqi military was a mistake.  We probably should have just handed them the keys and left, reminding them that we don't want to come back in 10 years....make sure we don't.  Here is our number if you want to be friends.
Logged
🦀🎂🦀🎂
CrabCake
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 19,295
Kiribati


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #2 on: March 27, 2015, 06:45:59 PM »

I think disbanding the Iraqi military and civil service was one of the worst decisions ever made by any US president. The west well and truly threw out the baby with the Ba'ath water.
Logged
OSR stands with Israel
Computer89
Atlas Legend
*****
Posts: 44,886


Political Matrix
E: 3.42, S: 2.61

P P P

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #3 on: March 27, 2015, 07:03:03 PM »

I think disbanding the Iraqi military and civil service was one of the worst decisions ever made by any US president. The west well and truly threw out the baby with the Ba'ath water.

Now many of former Suddam Huusain's Republican Gaurd are part of ISIS so they can take back power they fell was lost after the US disbanded their Army
Logged
🦀🎂🦀🎂
CrabCake
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 19,295
Kiribati


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #4 on: March 27, 2015, 07:13:04 PM »

Yes and many of them were radicalised during their stay in prisons.

I hope that idiot Paul Bremer is happy with himself nowadays...
Logged
Ebsy
Junior Chimp
*****
Posts: 8,001
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #5 on: March 27, 2015, 11:34:37 PM »

But doesn't that poke a hole in the dominant Republican theory that it was really Obama that destabilized the Iraq when he lost the invasion in 2003?
Logged
OSR stands with Israel
Computer89
Atlas Legend
*****
Posts: 44,886


Political Matrix
E: 3.42, S: 2.61

P P P

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #6 on: March 28, 2015, 02:25:36 AM »

But doesn't that poke a hole in the dominant Republican theory that it was really Obama that destabilized the Iraq when he lost the invasion in 2003?

For destablizing it does poke a hole in the Republican's theory but Obama did fail to react when ISIS invaded Fallujah in December of 2013 and if he started the air campaign then and their ISIS would have been stopped in their tracks. Now only ground troops have to come to stop it, and if they do  it probably wont because troops will occupy the land for ten years instead of just quickly defeating their enemy and leaving.

For the ISIS sitution I blame

50% on Bush/Cheny/Bremer- For disbanding Iraq Military which destabilized Iraq
40% on Maliki-  For not letting Sunni's participate in the government
10 % on Obama- For not keeping air cover for Iraq when they left in 2011
Logged
○∙◄☻¥tπ[╪AV┼cVê└
jfern
Atlas Institution
*****
Posts: 53,782


Political Matrix
E: -7.38, S: -8.36

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #7 on: March 28, 2015, 02:54:52 AM »

I think disbanding the Iraqi military and civil service was one of the worst decisions ever made by any US president. The west well and truly threw out the baby with the Ba'ath water.

We prefer Wahabbi jihadists to relatively secular Ba'athists. Just look at Syria.
Logged
OSR stands with Israel
Computer89
Atlas Legend
*****
Posts: 44,886


Political Matrix
E: 3.42, S: 2.61

P P P

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #8 on: March 28, 2015, 11:45:08 AM »

I think disbanding the Iraqi military and civil service was one of the worst decisions ever made by any US president. The west well and truly threw out the baby with the Ba'ath water.

We prefer Wahabbi jihadists to relatively secular Ba'athists. Just look at Syria.

Or Saudi Arabia
Logged
Sumner 1868
tara gilesbie
Junior Chimp
*****
Posts: 6,077
United States
Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #9 on: March 28, 2015, 02:59:01 PM »

Vietnam War: US doenst invade North Vietnam after stopping the  Tet offensive

How costly: Could have ended the war in 1968 instead of 1973

No it wouldn't. Unless it ends because of a mushroom cloud.
Logged
Mr. Smith
MormDem
Atlas Superstar
*****
Posts: 33,266
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #10 on: March 28, 2015, 03:34:56 PM »

Operation Ajax: Overthrew a democratically elected leader in Iran

Cost: Inevitable revolt causes the rise of a police state in 1979


1952 Cuba coup d'etat: Overthrew a democratically elected leader in Cuba over some results

Cost: Batista and then Castro.
Logged
OSR stands with Israel
Computer89
Atlas Legend
*****
Posts: 44,886


Political Matrix
E: 3.42, S: 2.61

P P P

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #11 on: March 28, 2015, 03:43:54 PM »

Vietnam War: US doenst invade North Vietnam after stopping the  Tet offensive

How costly: Could have ended the war in 1968 instead of 1973

No it wouldn't. Unless it ends because of a mushroom cloud.

US invading North Korea didnt cause a mushroom cloud. All this does is puts pressure on the North Vietnamese when they are weak which forces them to agree to a cease fire in 1968 instead of 1973.
Logged
Sumner 1868
tara gilesbie
Junior Chimp
*****
Posts: 6,077
United States
Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #12 on: March 28, 2015, 03:47:05 PM »
« Edited: March 28, 2015, 03:50:53 PM by tara gilesbie »

Vietnam War: US doenst invade North Vietnam after stopping the  Tet offensive

How costly: Could have ended the war in 1968 instead of 1973

No it wouldn't. Unless it ends because of a mushroom cloud.

US invading North Korea didnt cause a mushroom cloud. All this does is puts pressure on the North Vietnamese when they are weak which forces them to agree to a cease fire in 1968 instead of 1973.

The Soviet nuclear capability in 1950 was negligible. In 1968, it was very real. Also, China gained a nuclear arsenal in 1964.
Logged
Pages: [1]  
« previous next »
Jump to:  


Login with username, password and session length

Terms of Service - DMCA Agent and Policy - Privacy Policy and Cookies

Powered by SMF 1.1.21 | SMF © 2015, Simple Machines

Page created in 0.03 seconds with 11 queries.