|Funny Pictures||Funny Videos|
|Funny GIFs||YouTube Videos|
Rank #43 on CommentsLevel 398 Comments: Demi God
OfflineSend mail to warlockrichard Block warlockrichard Invite warlockrichard to be your friend flag avatar
I don't suffer from insanity, I enjoy every minute of it.
latest user's comments
|#1 - wait what there's dlc?!? [+] (5 new replies)||10/28/2014 on As a player I am deeply...||+27|
|#13 - Picture||10/28/2014 on Dance Party!||+4|
|#62 - Picture||10/28/2014 on Worth Reading||+2|
|#52 - Picture||10/28/2014 on just imagine the internet...||+13|
|#161 - Picture||10/28/2014 on Gore Compilation||0|
|#37 - Picture||10/28/2014 on Monster attack||0|
|#42 - Picture||10/28/2014 on very tough||0|
|#41 - Picture||10/28/2014 on very tough||+1|
|#156 - Picture||10/28/2014 on they still got it||+2|
|#2 - I think I just felt my scrotum crawl upwards into my pelvis||10/27/2014 on When you have balls of steel||0|
|#1 - while this may have been true in the pre-vietnam era we have c… [+] (18 new replies)||10/27/2014 on 'murica||+31|
#7 - anon (10/28/2014) [-]
Are you fucking kidding me? Vietnam was the start of you guys losing your grip on military tactics, since you were still expecting to be fighting in an environment populated solely with enemy combatants. Guerrilla warfare has consistently knocked you, the Brits, and pretty much every other military force on the planet, for six. Your solution was to just butcher the entire local populace, since you'd be bound to kill a few insurgents eventually. End result: despised at home, losing appeal from the international community, and actually encouraging civilians in Vietnam to join the Vietcong. Same thing happened in Gulf War 1. You had another crack at it in Gulf War 2 and failed. Now you're mustering the solitary muscle of military might to have a crack at Gulf War 3.
#66 - anon (10/28/2014) [-]
Islamic extremists go way back to like 50 years ago.
#12 - Rockaman (10/28/2014) [-]
Not really, the war dragged on for a long time without any big gains being made even with public support. The tactics used there were what lost the war - going out on patrols to find the enemy will never work as a decent tactic, as the enemy will only fight when it suits them.
Vietnam was a lost war from the start.
#65 - biebergotswag (10/28/2014) [-]
actually after the tet offensive, the NVA lost a fifth of it's soldiers, and their rank was thrown in absolute chaos. it's was pretty much as bad for the north vietnamese, as it was bad for the romans during the battle of Cannae. just one major offensive is pretty much sure to break them. but instead the media described the great south Vietnam victory into a american defeat and further destroyed war efforts.
also, remember that the north vietnamese were also supported by the soviet and chinese military, thus the scale of the war is much larger than most people realize. and by withdrawing support from the war. it allowed the soviets to restore the viet cong and massacre the south vietnamese.
if the americans just pushed against the broken NVA, they would have crushed it and stopped the war.
#26 - jdrinfantry (10/28/2014) [-]
The Brits had lost so much ground around Keenan due to the fact that they stayed in their FOB, and refused to do patrols to engage the enemy. This resulted in the taleban pushing them back and basically laying siege to the FOB.
When we got there, we had this impressive Company leader (Captain Storrud) As he said during a ceremony of our first casualty"Tomorrow we fight again". Despite of heavy losses we went on daily patrols to bring the fight to enemy. We almost had our entire AO secured after just 6 months. It was really impressive what combat patrols can do.
#81 - jdrinfantry (10/28/2014) [-]
We never went on combat patrols with less than 30 men during the day. At night we'd send out smaller sniper teams, special forces patrols etc, in cover of the darkness they would sneak out and gather intel / take out high value targets.
There's obviously no fact list on how to fight Guerillas, and it is way harder to avoid ambushes when you're fighting enemies that could be any random civilian. But our tactics involving daily combat patrols proved effective. We had some trouble avoiding IEDs and boobytraps, but we'd try and be as unpredictable as possible in our movement.
#32 - Rockaman (10/28/2014) [-]
It is, but as a tactic to destroy your enemy it is highly ineffective, as you'll only ever fight them when they want to fight, so if they have plenty of numbers, they'll attack regularly, but as soon as they start to dwindle, they can hide and wait for reinforcements / new recruits, meaning you'll never be able to destroy them.
#34 - jdrinfantry (10/28/2014) [-]
Vietnam is a complicated defeat really. I blame the lack of political support of course. But also their cavalry tactics. You remember watching movies of american landing with helicopters in the middle of a firefight? That's just about the dumbest way to engage an enemy. Imagine the enemy being in entrenched positions and then landing on top of them, that could EASILY lead to 1:10 casualty rates.
#41 - Rockaman (10/28/2014) [-]
The VC had such a decent network of spies and informants that they knew where the patrols would be coming from, so were almost always the ambushers. On top of being on home turf where it was easy to slip away, they could then disappear once their enemie's reinforcements arrive. Also, combat patrols are really bad in booby-trapped locations, IEDs in Iraq and Afghanistan have also amounted to large numbers of casualties.
Yes they are good at securing your lines and keeping supplies coming, but as an offensive tactic they are really quite poor.
I'd say that Vietnam was pretty complicated, but I think tactical error plus the effective Vietnamese tactics were more to blame for the defeat than political support as the war had plenty of support to start with and that support dwindled after failures and large scale offenses by the VC and NVA when the US public believed they were winning. If the failures had never happened then support would have probably stayed high.
#51 - jdrinfantry (10/28/2014) [-]
Combat patrols are not tactical mistakes.
Conducting a proper patrol without enemy getting intel of your whereabouts may be difficult, but quite necessary.
If the US had siezed conducting patrols all together where do you think that would have lead them? (By the way, in Vietnam they almost stopped their patrols during the Tet Offensive)
Also I think the casualty statistics speak for themselves when it comes to who was the superior military power and strategies. It is estimated that 1.1 million NVAs and Viet Congs died during the vietnam war, as opposed to US KIAs numbering around 58.000
|#1 - Picture||10/27/2014 on Das Racist||0|
|#19 - Picture||10/27/2014 on Battlefield mechanics||+7|
|#33 - Picture||10/27/2014 on rekt||+1|
|#104 - Picture||10/27/2014 on Kings of the Hill||+4|
|#263 - democracy is two wolves and a sheep voting on what to have for dinner||10/27/2014 on Lovely Pizza||+3|
|#1 - Picture||10/27/2014 on When they be passin' by...||0|
|#1 - Picture||10/27/2014 on Pvt. Anon and the hung over...||+98|
|#52 - Picture||10/27/2014 on You see Ivan, when you...||0|
|#90 - Picture [+] (1 new reply)||10/27/2014 on 25 Crossovers||+17|
|#2 - Picture [+] (3 new replies)||10/27/2014 on I thought it was cool..||+81|
|#19 - Picture||10/27/2014 on Oh Snap!||+7|
|#19 - Picture||10/27/2014 on To battle||+27|
|#1 - Picture||10/27/2014 on What's next?||+11|
|#43 - Picture||10/27/2014 on Japan Today||0|