Posted on Jun 5, 2016
Can "Limited War" be an effective strategy in defeating a nation's enemies?
8.8K
106
97
6
6
0
Posted in these groups: 
Strategy
Strategy
Posted >1 y ago
Responses: 55
0
0
0
0
0
0
No. This has been a huge problem since WWII. If we are willing to go to war then we should be willing to go the distance. We should Conquor and assimilate the conquered country. It's pretty easy to look at world history and see how successful campaigns were carried out.
(0)
(0)
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
As I posed this question I had an idea what the majority response would be, "limited war" brings limited results. So why, when faced with a national threat, our civilian leaders trot out the "limited war" strategy to counter the threat?
(0)
(0)
1SG Harold Piet
The longer the war last the more money they and their cronies make supplying goods and services and the people stand behind supporting the troops for a long time.
(0)
(0)
SGT Eliyahu Rooff
Keep in mind that any war which does not include the use of our nuclear arsenal is, by definition, a limited war. We really don't want or need an "unlimited" war.
(0)
(0)
Read This Next
Continue with Facebook 
Continue with Google