Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

I could not believe this viewpoint coming from a military person, particularly a highly trained one. The Germans seem to have changed a lot since World War II.

I think that in the coming battle the US special forces are going to be the ones who are going to be "fanatics". Americans have over five thousand dead to avenge.

1 posted on 09/24/2001 6:23:55 AM PDT by ReveBM (reve_britmil@hotmail.com)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies ]


To: ReveBM
Hey, these folks willing to die will die just as easily as anyone else. Maybe more so.
2 posted on 09/24/2001 6:24:57 AM PDT by Poohbah
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: ReveBM
The Brig Gen insisted that troops with a "western philosophy" and a will not to die would have "little chance against men who are willing to give their lives in a fight".

I don't understand this comment. Americans are willing to give their lives to their country as well. When has that ever not been the case in war? These terrorists may be zealots but they don't stand a chance against our highly trained, motivated and well-equipped soldiers.

Our real worry in this conflict is not our how soldiers will perform in the field but how civilians will react to more instances of terror on American soil. This is the only real advantage these terrorists have, if it can be called that - they are willing to murder innocent civilians.

4 posted on 09/24/2001 6:34:43 AM PDT by SamAdams76
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: ReveBM
The 57-year-old brigadier general...

...is a career bureaucrat. Seriously, how many times has he had to lead men into battle? None? The courageous general is close to retirement and wants to spend his remaining time authorizing toilet paper requisitions, not lead men into battle.

5 posted on 09/24/2001 6:36:58 AM PDT by randog
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: ReveBM
The General screwed up. What he has just done is to go public with his............let's call it what it is..............fear of his enemy. That is NOT proper. Wanna go to the O Club and bi*ch to your fellow generals over some drinks? Go ahead. To hit the Net and tell the bad guys that you fear their willingness to give up their lives, their fanaticism, etc., is just plain stupid How will his crack troops react in combat now? Doesn't he think that such a mindset could or will filter down to his men........planting just enough of a seed of doubt? THAT gets men killed as much as walking into battle unprepared.

Look, these Afghanis are NOT supermen. They are crafty, they know their country, they know the terrain like the backs of their hands. They are plenty dedicated. That's all true. However, they're about to face some plenty pi$$ed-off Americans who are going in to right a terrible wrong done to OUR country this time. If the good general doesn't see the difference, then maybe it's time for him to hang up his stars.

6 posted on 09/24/2001 6:39:58 AM PDT by RightOnline
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: ReveBM
The only serious forces in NATO belong to Britain and France. Most of the rest are a bunch of blow-dried peaceniks who wouldn't want to get their uniforms dirty or risk getting hurt. I'm sure the German army is technologically sophisticated, but I'm not at all sure how good their morale is. If anyone could be expected to be tough and ready to fight, it's the head of special forces. Good grief. Fire this man.
10 posted on 09/24/2001 7:16:26 AM PDT by Cicero
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: ReveBM,Poohbah,randog,SamAdams76,snopercod,mommadooo3,brityank,Covenantor
The general is shrewd.

The Taliban functions ostensibly for religious reasons, but actually at the pleasure of external - Afghan powers.

O. B. Laden is the purposeful "black sheep" of the Saudi family; his role --- that is, "the movement" --- is to be situated so as to be part of the checking and balancing of the various oil and gas transmission alliances involved in the giant trans - Eurasian oil and gas infrastructure which has been in development for nearly 30 years, now.

The Red Chinese, the Russians, the Saudis, the Persians, the Iraqis, the Syrians, the Libyans, et al ... all desire that the oil and gas transmission "bidness" be within their respective "spheres of influence."

The resulting gamesmanship resembles that of the "old days" when various powers that be maneuvered to get the railroads to be located where each power desired.

The "various powers that be," engage in and then break alliances, which in one instant may seem encouraging, but in the next instant, "somebody is left out to dry" (among the many game moves).

The German general is all too aware of what special forces can do, as well as what they cannot do --- in the face of political forces which are unreliable, and in the face of the public's uncertainties about politicians' equivocating --- an example being, how immigration amnesty for over 6 mil illegal aliens was a good idea, "let 'em in," while establishing a Ministry of State Security to make war on the people already American citizens.

Given, that the emphasis has been on stripping airline passengers of their nail files --- examinination under the microscope, while the "higher-ups'" backs are turned and they ignore the points where security really did lapse ON ORDER OF THE WHITE HOUSE DURING THE CLINTON ADMINISTRATION.

Which administration is still in effect though nominally headed by a few officials of the Bush "Administration."

What is the point, a German general may ask, in minutely examining the powder kit of Ms. Jones while grossly ignoring the millions flowing across the border?

The good general may smell too many rats and quite possibly, really bad available intelligence: the lighter the attacking force, the better must be the required information.

General forces can "slug it out" and use recon in force as well as movement to gain ground. But special forces are "surgical" and need the best M.R.I. they can get; especially when they are expected to attack many points.

What is the point in committing light troops where the heavy follow-up is ... not?!

What the Soviets, Red Chinese, Cubans, and Euro-Socialists fostered in the anti-west terrorist and political movements since World War II, has now got legs of its own and at least come back to bight some of Europe and some of Russia; and has finally "succeeded" in attacking the U.S. mainland punitively. But perhaps not yet enough for especially Russia and the U.S.A. to be blood allies.

The Clinton Administration poured a lot of aid into the sphere of influence that is Red China's, while "lending" money to an already broke Russia, thereby keeping Russia at a trough from which it has had a heck of a time trying to recover. All this, to enable the development of energy projects to provide the "juice" for the enormous pool of cheap (by force of communism) labor of Red China's. Which strategy has been OK with world wide, i.e. "globalist," investors.

Except, up to the point where the traditional oil powers, such as the Arabs, require some counter-balance to ensure that *their* oil and gas remain in demand.

And then others getting into the act.

Any of whom, would not want to totally remove the Taliban as a useful game plot device.

Globalists playing with peoples' lives.

The German general would probably like to see some righteous unity trumping [what he has no doubt learned to expect in the way of] "the deal" suddenly being "in" [and support for his troops being "out"].

It would overall be cheaper in blood and tears, as well as the price tag, for the U.S.A. to build a merchant fleet and naval fleet to protect it, and then go get the oil and gas --- DIRECTLY --- and forget the damned oil and gas infrastructure pipelines.

But that would require the invested "powers that be" to suck it in and take the loss.

Perhaps the German general is more astute; and he is trying to tell us something in a manner which he can relate, if we get his drift.

12 posted on 09/24/2001 7:39:04 AM PDT by First_Salute
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: ReveBM
The Brig Gen insisted that troops with a "western philosophy" and a will not to die would have "little chance against men who are willing to give their lives in a fight".

I'm surprised that a man with a military background seems to know little of military history. We have faced enemies who were willing to give their lives in a fight. Quite recently, in fact. The Japanese who fought our forces in the Pacific Theatre were absolutely fanatic. They were willing to anything for their Emperor. Walking into American lines with their hands up, then blowing up a belt full of grenades? Sure, they did that. Crashing planes into ships and other targets or opportunity? Yep, did that, too. Jump off of cliffs rather than be captured? Okinawa and other places saw this.

Point is, we've seen it before, and managed to win out in the end. How? Superior logistics, tactics, courage, and, most of all, the will to fight to the end, to do whatever was necessary to end the war decisively in our favor.

14 posted on 09/24/2001 8:08:01 AM PDT by chimera
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: ReveBM
Gees, the germans already have gay Generals in their military. The west has become a haven for scaredy cats.
15 posted on 09/24/2001 8:19:01 AM PDT by lavaroise
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: ReveBM
I recall the same stuff said about the Iraqies before the Gulf War. The Center for Defense Analysis (a think tank of pacifist and deadly stupid US Admirals and Generals) said we would need 10,000 body bags for our dead troops because of the fierceness of the Iraqui troops. I have heard little from them since.
18 posted on 09/24/2001 8:52:37 AM PDT by beekeeper
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: Comment
The General COMMANDS the 'KSK', he is no fool, and definitely not a coward.
He doesn't want his 'elite' wasted on enviornmental folly.
(maybe,'pearls' of wisdom)
Neutron bombs weapon of choice?
IMHO
21 posted on 09/26/2001 7:03:45 AM PDT by maestro
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: ReveBM
What if the USA hadn't been willing to lose 330,000 men in WWII?
26 posted on 09/26/2001 4:43:53 PM PDT by marajade (maraskywalker@earthlink.net)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson