Green Berets outfought, outthought the Taliban

http://www.usatoday.com/ ^ | 01/07/2002 | By Kirk Spitzer

[sneakypete]

Special Forces units can have "pretty good" success in jungle warfare but nowhere near the "we won the war all by ourselves" success that the American public may now expect to be the norm in all future conflicts regardless of the terrain.

SF didn't win this one "all by themselves",either. They relied on Northern Alliance ground troops for the "on the ground muscle". Air power alone will never defeat a enemy unless it goes nuke. You still need infantry on the ground to occupy the enemies territory and disarm him. This will never change.

[Polybius]

SF didn't win this one "all by themselves",either. They relied on Northern Alliance ground troops for the "on the ground muscle". Air power alone will never defeat a enemy unless it goes nuke. You still need infantry on the ground to occupy the enemies territory and disarm him. This will never change.

I totally agree with you on that. That's one Truth about warfare that the Air Force boys that worship at the altar of St. Billy Mitchell will never understand.

When I referred to "all by themselves" I meant in relation to the rest of the U.S. Army that has been guarding airports while the Rangers and the Green Berets are racking up those unprecedented kill ratios.

[walden]

My friend says of Vietnam, "It was a crappy war, but it was the only war we had." He would have volunteered anyway, as would many others, but many of those volunteers would not have done so had there not been a draft.

[SMEDLEYBUTLER]

That's true, volunteers only had a two year commitment, but the predominant thought throughout much of America is that nobody volunteered, everyone was drafted unwillingly. Contrast that to World War II where only one third of those who served were volunteers and the draft age had to be lowered because there weren't enough volunteers. The predominant thought in America about that war is that everybody volunteered and that too, isn't true.