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

To: TheLooseThread
Massive and overwhelming force has been the approach for at least 60 years.

I think we deviated from this in Vietnam. Powell started his career in a theater where it seemed that we were never quite willing to commit the resources necessary to decisively win the conflict. Too much piecemeal execution, which I believe make a big impression on Powell ... either you commit a force large enough to win or you don't get involved.

That said, "massive force" today does not necessarily mean what it did a few years ago. History is filled with a lot of examples where the military prepared to fight the last war, and failed to fully appreciate the implications of new technologies and techniques. (Billy Mitchell is a classic example of someone who had a vision of what was possible in the future yet paid a major price for thinking "outside the box".)

I think we have some leaders in place now that have truly thought about new ways to convincingly win. We are going to deploy massive force -- just a new definition of massive force.

10 posted on 02/20/2003 5:36:05 PM PST by StevieB
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies ]


To: StevieB
There was a lot of nastiness involved in that SEAsian Unpleasantness. One legacy of it, though, is that it'll be much harder to scam people about how we're doing - want to know how we're doing? Get a map and two colors of marking pens - color in the territory "we" control and the territory "they" control.
11 posted on 02/20/2003 5:44:02 PM PST by 185JHP ( "Big Oil, Big Buttons, Ultrarightwingers in Red China?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | 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