Posted on Jun 5, 2016
Can "Limited War" be an effective strategy in defeating a nation's enemies?
8.93K
106
97
6
6
0
Posted >1 y ago
Responses: 55
I skimmed the replies and they all seem to echo the same thing. But let's look at some of the winners of limited war: Yugoslavians in WWII, Mao Tse Tung, Ho Chi Minh (twice), Che Guevara (couple of times), ... Why did they win in "limited wars"?
Mao hit the nail on the head: "The guerrilla must move amongst the people as a fish swims in the sea."
( https://www.brainyquote.com/quotes/quotes/m/maozedong138236.html)
So what do the losers (us) do? We bomb the shit out of everything; shoot the joint up; push the civilians around; rape, pillage, and burn; make sure nobody cares or understands the locals.
So it's pretty obvious that doesn't work. What would? The Co-Mao Doctrine: The counter-guerilla force has to drain the sea and leave the fish flopping on the shore. If the people get fair treatment and redress of their grievances, the sea dries up. When I worked at Bell Labs we had a sad saying "We don't have time to do it right but we have enough time to do it over." BTW, the chances of convincing an Islamic country to have a Jeffersonian democracy are zip.
How do I know it works? I just got back from two weeks in Vietnam (Thanks, Bill and Gene of VietnamBattleFieldTours.com and my companions). Happily, it looks like the people are getting somewhere: though called "socialist", they have a thriving stock market and all kinds of banks (both public and private). One of our tour guides' father was VC. Seemed to me that capitalism is alive and well. Wasn't that what the Vietnam War was about?
Mao hit the nail on the head: "The guerrilla must move amongst the people as a fish swims in the sea."
( https://www.brainyquote.com/quotes/quotes/m/maozedong138236.html)
So what do the losers (us) do? We bomb the shit out of everything; shoot the joint up; push the civilians around; rape, pillage, and burn; make sure nobody cares or understands the locals.
So it's pretty obvious that doesn't work. What would? The Co-Mao Doctrine: The counter-guerilla force has to drain the sea and leave the fish flopping on the shore. If the people get fair treatment and redress of their grievances, the sea dries up. When I worked at Bell Labs we had a sad saying "We don't have time to do it right but we have enough time to do it over." BTW, the chances of convincing an Islamic country to have a Jeffersonian democracy are zip.
How do I know it works? I just got back from two weeks in Vietnam (Thanks, Bill and Gene of VietnamBattleFieldTours.com and my companions). Happily, it looks like the people are getting somewhere: though called "socialist", they have a thriving stock market and all kinds of banks (both public and private). One of our tour guides' father was VC. Seemed to me that capitalism is alive and well. Wasn't that what the Vietnam War was about?
(0)
(0)
Capt Christian D. Orr
SGT Steve Adams - Of course, most pundits in the media and academia conveniently overlook the 2.5 million (especially those of Han Chinese descent) murdered by Hanoi after the communist, er, socialist, er, "nationalist" takeover of South Vietnam in 1975. That number is, of course, overlooked because it doesn't conveniently fit the narrative of the NVA and Viet Cong as noble praiseworthy nationalists fighting the oh-so-evil "dirty stinking Yankee Air Pirates" (i.e.. us) and their puppet lackeys (i.e. our South Vietnamese allies). Ho-hum, nothing to see here, please disperse....
(0)
(0)
PO2 David Allender
Capt. Stevenson, the people you named were commies. They used the commie logic to influence the people that have suffered for a thousand years thru bad leadership. The commies promise the people good paying jobs, education for the kids, etc. (Communist doctrine) to get the people on their side. Have you notice anybody that is educated and have good paying jobs in China, Russia, North Korea, or even Cuba? None of the above named people had to fight much, but lied up a storm. Now the people are indoctrinated in a communist society, where they can not complain about anything and have to do as ordered or go thru another education period (indoctrination of Communism) or go to prison or be executed. I have always been sorry for the people of South Viet Nam for what they had to go thru after Sai-Gon fell. i realize that we can-not save the world, but those people worked hard for us while we were there for ten years, then we cut and ran and left them to their fate. How many boat people died trying to leave Nam to get to another country and freedom? We will never know. There were some very good and descent people in Nam, and I know that we left a lot of them to a very bleak future. If we Christians had listened to Sister Lucy of fatama and had gotten Russia converted to Christianity, then none of the wars after World war two would have happened. I bleive this with all my heart. Russia is the main culprit in this world today and they will show just how bad they can be very shortly. As the world was caught off-guard at the beginning of World war 1 & 2, the world will be caught again off-guard for World War 3. I am 74 tears old, but I am more scared for our country than at any time in my life. Sorry, I did not mean to get on a soap box. I sound like a politician, except what I say, I mean from the bottom of my heart. I still love my country, even though there have been some serious changes made over the years that have hurt us deeply. Our allies do not trust us anymore, and I can not blame them one bit.
(0)
(0)
CPT Dennis Stevenson
The people I named were communists, But in the case of Ho Chi Minh, he was a nationaiist from the git-go. I just spent two weeks in Viet Nam in the old I Corps area. I'd say the last thing that those folks are is Communist and if Truman would have pulled his head out from where the sun don't shine, there would have been no Viet Nam war.
BTW, Russia is Christian. BTW (2) After seeing what I saw in Viet Nam, I'm not a Christian any more either.
BTW, Russia is Christian. BTW (2) After seeing what I saw in Viet Nam, I'm not a Christian any more either.
(0)
(0)
No I don't. If we fight against a sovereign nation, we fight until we achieve our goals. But if we against a terrorist group/ organization then we fight a Total War. As described in Sun Tzu'so Art of War, like Sherman did in our Civil War.
(0)
(0)
PO2 David Allender
Not with the present administration we will. And i fear neither one of the candidates running is qualified for CIC of this nation. They both talk hard line, but what will happen when the you know what hits the fan? They won't be ready, nether will our nation.
(0)
(0)
In 1909, Carnegie Endowment for International Peace was tasked to answer the following question posted by the U.S. Government:
If it is desirable to alter the lives of an entire nation, is there any means more efficient than war?
After a year of studying and trying to find another way:
Answer:
There is no known means more efficient than war, assuming the objective is altering the life of an entire nation.
If it is desirable to alter the lives of an entire nation, is there any means more efficient than war?
After a year of studying and trying to find another way:
Answer:
There is no known means more efficient than war, assuming the objective is altering the life of an entire nation.
(0)
(0)
Sp4 Byron Skinner…I won't get into the tactical or political reasons for :Limited War" what is important is the effect that the military/industrial sector of the economy has became. The US has been at war since 2001. In that time and industry that was splinted up into a lot of small companies has through mergers, buyouts become an economic giant. For political reasons the Mega Defense industry has established a strong economic presence in all 50 states. The economic foot print of defense and military is about a trillion dollars a year and growing, that is roughly about 5% of the US's GDP. Most of the impact is in hourly employment or in active or reserve military. Any disruption now in this sector will not ripple throughout the economy but blow through it. The majority of the civilian and senior military have mortgages, children, and consume a lot of groceries, children clothing and nearly everything else. In short we have created a beast that needs feeding. Not feed it will eat us.
(0)
(0)
PO2 David Allender
Unfortunately though, most of the heavy industry used by the military to make war equipment is made overseas. The mega industries make trillion of dollars, but pay little to achieve it to the labor force in Mexico and other counties. As long as home office is her in the US, they pay no import tax. I believe that any product of outside the US should have to pay import tax, no matter where the home office is at. What scares me the most is what happens when we do go to war. The industry becomes the puppet of the country they are in. We lose an industry because of greed. Industry should be brought back to the US to give jobs to people. We were strong when everybody worked. Now we are becoming a nation of needy because of a lack of jobs. Again, bring industry back to the United States where we can produced as we used to and grow again in pride.
(0)
(0)
No. Our enemies don't fight "limited wars." all we do is screw our own troops over by forcing them to fight with one hand tied behind the back.
(0)
(0)
Yes and no! Yes we can win a limited war here at home because the enemy will not have the resources to fight us on our own ground and no it will not work in other countries..because the infrastructure of the country we are fighting does not have the support of its own people. Iraq is a prime choice. We fought ..we won. Yet the government handed the country over with out support or a proper government in place to control the country. I see all these countries doing through what they and wonder..."Why are all the men running from Syria when the should be fighting for home family country ?".....They have no loyalty because of education and being controlled by dictators for years. We as Americans have each other and with the love and hate (As of late) we know that no one better come mess with us even if we do not like each other...You are and American and we will fight to protect you! I can smack you but they better not touch you lol
Chuck D
Chuck D
(0)
(0)
No; best case in "Limited War" is status quo. Defeating your enemy requires a nation's total commitment!!
(0)
(0)
1LT William Clardy
With all due respect, you're wrong, LTC Mark Beattie.
Defeating an enemy only requires making his continued resistance more expensive than he can bear. Losing sight of that basic truth rapidly transforms into arguing for escalating all conflicts into existential wars.
The 1982 war between Argentina and the United Kingdom is an excellent example of an instance where, even though both sides committed significant resources, the overall conduct of the war was very limited in scope -- no bombs fell on either homeland, and once the primary territorial dispute was effectively settled by force of arms, neither party considered broadening the conflict in an attempt to avoid conceding defeat.
Defeating an enemy only requires making his continued resistance more expensive than he can bear. Losing sight of that basic truth rapidly transforms into arguing for escalating all conflicts into existential wars.
The 1982 war between Argentina and the United Kingdom is an excellent example of an instance where, even though both sides committed significant resources, the overall conduct of the war was very limited in scope -- no bombs fell on either homeland, and once the primary territorial dispute was effectively settled by force of arms, neither party considered broadening the conflict in an attempt to avoid conceding defeat.
(1)
(0)
MSgt Fred Gottshalk
How do you conduct a war, when folks like ISIS hides among civilians, in schools, hospitals. When the civilian populace lets this happen, they are complicit.....
(0)
(0)
Read This Next