11–20 of 63 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Huh? This is about military training, equipment, and logistics, not religion.
Most of the Islamic fundamentalism that the USA is fighting today can be traced back to that one event.
...
> Two insights appear to have particular salience still today. First, the use of irregular forces largely made up of foreigners with a backbone of British officers and non-commissioned officers was a force multiplier that had dramatic impacts in multiple theaters for the British.
The article seems to argue that the US should emulate the British use of troops made up of colonial subjects commanded by the titular "British masters". But unlike the British colonial empire, the American sphere of influence is mostly comprised of sovereign countries whose governments might object to foreign-controlled guerillas operating in their territory primarily to protect American interests. So I'm not sure whether that's really an "insight of particular salience still today".
Fascinating though this is, the negative long term impact of these guys tends to be much greater than their positive short-term impact. You go in, you train a bunch of locals as guerrillas, you achieve the objective, and then you get out, leaving the local guerrillas behind. These guys now have the knowledge, experience and organisation to make the place ungovernable. At least some of them will proceed to do so; eith…
Chechnya after the 1994-1996 war is also an excellent example.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
This does happen but is not necessary. Cases in point: Norway, France, Eastern Europe, Germany after WW2. The crucial difference seems to be that the winner must immediately invest in nation building or the defeated must be crushed.
Yea, firing the Iraqi Army after the 03 invasion was a small whoopsie.
Hitler in his bunker doesn't seem so crazy if he'd had cause (such as foreign intelligence reports, or incidents of separate negotiations?) to believe the Allies would have fallen out much sooner than they actually did, and of course someone in his position might've believed that Nazi Germany had been worth more as a wholesale bargain, than (as actually happened) picked up individual by individual at retail.
As to commitment to nation building, the (premature?) end of it in the former CSA came relatively rapidly: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Compromise_of_1877
Fascinating though this is, the negative long term impact of these guys tends to be much greater than their positive short-term impact. You go in, you train a bunch of locals as guerrillas, you achieve the objective, and then you get out, leaving the local guerrillas behind. These guys now have the knowledge, experience and organisation to make the place ungovernable. At least some of them will proceed to do so; eith…
It's a delusion of grandeur to think that Islamic fundamentalism owes its existence to a transient American action. American exceptionalism but from the Left.
Islamic fundamentalism was around before American involvement and it'll be around after. Nobody is claiming otherwise.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Most of the Islamic fundamentalism that the USA is fighting today can be traced back to that one event.
Fighting being the relevant word. If they hadn’t been armed and trained, the fight would have been over before it began.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
It's a delusion of grandeur to think that Islamic fundamentalism owes its existence to a transient American action. American exceptionalism but from the Left.
It's a delusion of Western blamelessness to think that any supposed relationship between the actions of Islamic fundamentalists, their strategies and growth, implies that "Islamic fundamentalism owes its existence to a transient American action". Islamic fundamentalism was around before American involvement and it'll be around after. Nobody is claiming otherwise.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
It's a delusion of Western blamelessness to think that any supposed relationship between the actions of Islamic fundamentalists, their strategies and growth, implies that "Islamic fundamentalism owes its existence to a transient American action". Islamic fundamentalism was around before American involvement and it'll be around after. Nobody is claiming otherwise.
The origin of Afghan resistance was Soviet invasion. It was the 120,000 troops of Soviet mechanised infantry over 10 years that made Mujahedeen who they are, not a dozen CIA instructors showing them jumping jacks in Pakistan.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
The origin of Afghan resistance was Soviet invasion. It was the 120,000 troops of Soviet mechanised infantry over 10 years that made Mujahedeen who they are, not a dozen CIA instructors showing them jumping jacks in Pakistan.
MANPADs https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/FIM-92_Stinger#Soviet_War_in_A...
Anyway MANPAD handling skills are irrelevant to what we discuss here.