war too soft now

[wylin]

is it me of conflicts between nations are so tempered now compared to the days of world war 2 and korean war. The idea of limited warfare and striking on only military targets and taking 0 or limited losses really makes me feel irked? One smart bomb to kill 14 people in palestine and the worlds up in arms condeming isreal.

for example world war 2 USA, Japan, and Germany always conducted aerial and ground attacks that effected and targeted civilians. The firebombing and nuclear attack on japan, germany's bombing of london and using v2 ballistic missiles, japan using bioweapons and raping the chinese cities.

people could see all those as war crimes nowadays cuz they effect civillians. when did attacking civillians become so problematic? Has the idea and methodology of total war been lost.

random thought after watching too much gundam.

[SunWuKong]

we learn history so that we don't repeat our mistakes.



'nuff said

[wylin]

[quote:62ab3ca569="SunWuKung"]we learn history so that we don't repeat our mistakes.



'nuff said[/quote:62ab3ca569]

actually limited conflicts are more expensive and drawn out because ur not terrorizing and decimating the ememy population. Its just sumwhat more humane.

[kasia]

but isn't it true that during wwII and the korean war that the american people weren't fully aware of the atrocities taking place?

it wasn't until afterwards that the media gave the people the full story, right?

[wylin]

[quote:0f23cd64e4="kasia"]but isn't it true that during wwII and the korean war that the american people weren't fully aware of the atrocities taking place?

it wasn't until afterwards that the media gave the people the full story, right?[/quote:0f23cd64e4]

true mostly the push to sanatize war was from the american military it self tho. Pilots disliked carpet/ firebombing axis nations...indescimanant bombing, mostly people disliked the kind of carnage they inflicted on non combatants. But wars been like this forever and this topic was brought up in one of my classes bak at uci the idea of unlimited war and limited conflict. personally i think for the aspect of the palestine/ isreal conflict the limited war tactic begets reprisal and revenge pattern of deaht and limited conflict. One of these days one isreali coalition government might say F-it and begin a much messier noholds bar conflict. denno...sumthing i saw on msnbc yest....and a random thought. right now the palestines are crying blood mary over 300-400 deaths, its nothing compared to the unlimited style of war practiced in the former yugoslavia...over religion and ethnic background.

[SunWuKong]

[quote:a827c9277f="wylin"]actually limited conflicts are more expensive and drawn out because ur not terrorizing and decimating the ememy population. Its just sumwhat more humane.[/quote:a827c9277f]


and being more humane (or at least trying to be) is the entire point. we are trying to limit the number of deaths necessary in armed conflicts. the reason we do this is because we are opposed to the atrocities that happened during past warfare, but yet we recognize that sometimes fighting is inevitable. this is what i meant when i said that history is learned so we don't repeat historical mistakes.

[wylin]

[quote:274db7040a="SunWuKung"][quote:274db7040a="wylin"]actually limited conflicts are more expensive and drawn out because ur not terrorizing and decimating the ememy population. Its just sumwhat more humane.[/quote:274db7040a]


and being more humane (or at least trying to be) is the entire point. we are trying to limit the number of deaths necessary in armed conflicts. the reason we do this is because we are opposed to the atrocities that happened during past warfare, but yet we recognize that sometimes fighting is inevitable. this is what i meant when i said that history is learned so we don't repeat historical mistakes.[/quote:274db7040a]

i guess, i think attacking civillians is a valid tactic especially since the united states still aims its nuclear arms at civillian areas throughout the world. We just need a nuclear level and less messy way to attack civillians and infrastructure of nations (dams, oil fields, power plants, satellites, communication infrastructure). Interesting thing i read in popular science was that the US is developing more newer types (that space shuttle) of orbital and reuseable vehicles, and that u could feasablely use those to do nuclear level damage by dropping sumthing the size of a car onto earth from high orbit. So i doubt the idea of bloodless will triumph in the end.

u can use drones and robots to fight ur battles but what is learned from war w/o the human loss and human suffering? nothing its just glorified chess w/o loss of life ...and i think the public will have to learn that sumtime. Americans havent seen the 1:1 infantry casualties of WW2 european theater and massive cassualties in Iwojima and Saipan and even vietnam. In vietnam US was getting 1:2 air air loss ration 1 american plane for every vietnamese plane shot down, it was close to this in korea also since the migs were more advanced. Infantry conflict in vietnam it was pretty much 1:1 also 1 kill for an american for one vietnamese killed. I think people are spoiled now and forget wars messy.

Secondly attacking civilllians? wats barbaric bout that, its highly effective consider russia and the chechniya conflict. Notice theres no coverage of that on news? Thats because after 9/11 the russians go we're fighting terrorism and cover that instead. But what have they been doing? Butchingering Chechyans and leveling their cities w/ artilery and aerial attacks. The way their fighting now is wat Serbia's Milosovich called the "slavic way" ethnic cleasing...effect tactic tho the russians seemed to have pretty much solved their terrorism problem from chechniya cuz everyones dead or a refuge. ? effective yes, but human no...then again when was war human.

[SunWuKong]

war is never humane because loss of life is inevitable. but it's not black and white like that. it's not just "humane" or "inhumane". the more people die, the more terrible it is.

[achtungbaby]

[quote:e983b470a9="wylin"]i guess, i think attacking civillians is a valid tactic...[/quote:e983b470a9]

Did you admire 9/11 then for its tactical merits?

[kasia]

according to suntzu, war should only be the last resort and even though, the goal is to kill as few people as possible.

[SunWuKong]

[quote:17c0d995fb="kasia"]according to suntzu, war should only be the last resort and even though, the goal is to kill as few people as possible.[/quote:17c0d995fb]


did you know that american military academies study the [i:17c0d995fb]art of war[/i:17c0d995fb]? not that i know from first hand experience, but at least that's i've heard.

sun tzu also said that as soon as you go to war, you've already lost.

[wylin]

[quote:30a42448c2="achtungbaby"][quote:30a42448c2="wylin"]i guess, i think attacking civillians is a valid tactic...[/quote:30a42448c2]

Did you admire 9/11 then for its tactical merits?[/quote:30a42448c2]

yes and no, i think if u look at it from the islamic fundamentalist perspective it was an excellent opperation crippling infrastructure and economic system of their "enemy". It disabled the "western" society for weeks, especially their all important financial market system.

But its not a conflict between 2 states. killin civillians of your state that your at war w/ is fine in my book. but not vigalantee organizations making their own agendas.

I admire bravery and willingness to go the extra mile for your beliefs. whose right or wrong ? The islamic people and militant organizations arent evil their fighting for their way of life and so are the western powers. Who ever triumphs in a conflict decides wats good and bad.

[wylin]

[quote:7bbd48c97c="kasia"]according to suntzu, war should only be the last resort and even though, the goal is to kill as few people as possible.[/quote:7bbd48c97c]

then again chinese people suck at war compared to the surrounding korean and japanese cultures and their own internal (often) conflicts. their society is based around learning and every time we need to fight historically they just rally up the country side. SunTzu's Art of war i've read but i dont hold that high esteem for it.

A country u should study if u want excellent tactics on conflict and war is Russia actually. no ones ever beat them on their own soil. Not nepolean not hitler not islamic radicals.

also i think u should go all out in warfare but after a nations won rebuild and help ur rivals not just killem and raze and leave them dead.

[SunWuKong]

i won't dispute the effectiveness of killing civilians in a war. but personally i think what's more important is that the number of deaths be minimized in any and all situations. it may be less effective, but it would be [i:ec4d4eb40b]more humane[/i:ec4d4eb40b]. maybe that sounds silly in a war, but i think that's important. as such, i think that if it is within our power at all, we should limit the number of casualties, civilian or military.

all i gotta say is, wylin, i hope you don't become president of the u s of a within my lifetime. c'est toute.

[wylin]

[quote:c7a8ef6172="SunWuKung"]

all i gotta say is, wylin, i hope you don't become president of the u s of a within my lifetime. c'est toute.[/quote:c7a8ef6172]

lol, remember the political compass my closest 2 were hitler and stalin er?

no i believe we should only fight conflicts to win, not to contain...so if ur gonna go half assed like vietnam and Iraq why go at all. Go only to win and go all the way till bagdad, u have totally defeated ur enemy...a live enemy state or leader means trouble. I wholely support assianation and supterfuge and spuring on indigeonous rebels. i just think we should use more then just air planes in conflicts.

why be humane? people die all the time...war is about sarafice and the leasons we learn from loosing our young men and women. w/o that we'd be fighting all the time. Centeral Theme to mobile suit gundam. If u ever wanna see a very good tirase on war watch the 1979 mobile suit gundam movies 1, 2, 3. they are a very good story and reflect my view point.

[SunWuKong]

[quote:86ee6beac0="wylin"]If u ever wanna see a very good tirase on war watch the 1979 mobile suit gundam movies 1, 2, 3. they are a very good story and reflect my view point.[/quote:86ee6beac0]


oh man i loved gundam when i was a tiny little kid watching it on tv.
i've always wondered if it would be possible to design a course studying post-ww2 japanese attitude toward warfare based on anime that has warfare as a central theme.

[wylin]

[quote:736c11da1f="SunWuKung"][quote:736c11da1f="wylin"]If u ever wanna see a very good tirase on war watch the 1979 mobile suit gundam movies 1, 2, 3. they are a very good story and reflect my view point.[/quote:736c11da1f]


oh man i loved gundam when i was a tiny little kid watching it on tv.
i've always wondered if it would be possible to design a course studying post-ww2 japanese attitude toward warfare based on anime that has warfare as a central theme.[/quote:736c11da1f]

probably gundam movies and Z and Chars counter attack are props yoshiyuki tomino's best anti war themes. Studio Nue's Macross is also a good way to see japans attitude toward war. be a fun class good material.

[kasia]

[quote:442cf5e0be="wylin"]why be humane? people die all the time...war is about sarafice and the leasons we learn from loosing our young men and women. w/o that we'd be fighting all the time.[/quote:442cf5e0be]

this may make some sense in theory but is highly problematic when applied to reality, don't you think?

[wylin]

[quote:f45aab9fa6="kasia"][quote:f45aab9fa6="wylin"]why be humane? people die all the time...war is about sarafice and the leasons we learn from loosing our young men and women. w/o that we'd be fighting all the time.[/quote:f45aab9fa6]

this may make some sense in theory but is highly problematic when applied to reality, don't you think?[/quote:f45aab9fa6]

it makes sense, we have yet to see a bloodless war neither ur own countries robots killing the emeny countries robots. War is sumthing thats so horrible and deadly that u need to see and understand the brutality so that u wont make it glorified expensive chess.

[SunWuKong]

[quote:91c3646e1d="wylin"][quote:91c3646e1d="kasia"][quote:91c3646e1d="wylin"]why be humane? people die all the time...war is about sarafice and the leasons we learn from loosing our young men and women. w/o that we'd be fighting all the time.[/quote:91c3646e1d]

this may make some sense in theory but is highly problematic when applied to reality, don't you think?[/quote:91c3646e1d]

it makes sense, we have yet to see a bloodless war neither ur own countries robots killing the emeny countries robots. War is sumthing thats so horrible and deadly that u need to see and understand the brutality so that u wont make it glorified expensive chess.[/quote:91c3646e1d]


but see, i disagree with you that it's so black and white like that. there're degrees of how terrible a war is. i think you're kind of stretching it by justifying the amount of brutality you inflict by saying that people need to learn how terrible war it is. you're basically saying that we should tell people "hey this is what NOT to do" and then go ahead and do it ourselves!

[wylin]

[quote:e0bd69e016="SunWuKung"]
but see, i disagree with you that it's so black and white like that. there're degrees of how terrible a war is. i think you're kind of stretching it by justifying the amount of brutality you inflict by saying that people need to learn how terrible war it is. you're basically saying that we should tell people "hey this is what NOT to do" and then go ahead and do it ourselves![/quote:e0bd69e016]

Wars shades of grey and the winner dictates what is and what isnt righteous. If u win and slaughter thousands like the US did in WW2 then ur the righteous one, but it teachs boths winners and loosers the incredible cost of victory and defeat.

[SunWuKong]

[quote:2dfbd4e337="wylin"][quote:2dfbd4e337="SunWuKung"]
but see, i disagree with you that it's so black and white like that. there're degrees of how terrible a war is. i think you're kind of stretching it by justifying the amount of brutality you inflict by saying that people need to learn how terrible war it is. you're basically saying that we should tell people "hey this is what NOT to do" and then go ahead and do it ourselves![/quote:2dfbd4e337]

Wars shades of grey and the winner dictates what is and what isnt righteous. If u win and slaughter thousands like the US did in WW2 then ur the righteous one, but it teachs boths winners and loosers the incredible cost of victory and defeat.[/quote:2dfbd4e337]


so what are you really saying? that winning justifies all degrees of brutality? or that learning [b:2dfbd4e337]not[/b:2dfbd4e337] to be brutal justifies all degrees of brutality?

[wylin]

[quote:11e923e510="SunWuKung"][

so what are you really saying? that winning justifies all degrees of brutality? or that learning [b:11e923e510]not[/b:11e923e510] to be brutal justifies all degrees of brutality?[/quote:11e923e510]

both. Being victorious justifys the means, because a nation is in good standing and victorious or powerful it can exempt itself from any attrocities its commited. the united states being a perfect example by exempting its citzens from war crimes trials, by no signing the United Nations agreement/ treaty on an international continuous war crimes court. Thus since the united states is powerful and typically sucessful in warfare it can exempt its citzens and military's actions from the world court, this was done out of fear that the court would be used against the US in the future. Other nations like russia just black out the media and can do theirdirty buinsiness unimpeded.

im saying that war changes nations in general in different ways depending on what the conflict is over and the patriotic fervor of the nation. Learning thru the horrors of war is what teachs people and causes nations to go into patriotic frenzys or civil disobediance. Look at the brutality in yugoslavia or in india/ pakistan over kazakstan. The people on the street support the aggressive actions taken by the governement, war crime or what not...same w/ street people in Isreal they want peace by any means brutal or not. There will always be extremists but when ur population is willing to allow such brutality out then its on.

Brutality in general is a reality, u dont win battles by not killing anyone. U just try to kill as many of your enemies and destroy as much of their command and supply lines. That means attacking lightiy or unarmed people. in most nations that includes civillians.

[SunWuKong]

well i don't agree with "might makes right". and i definitely don't agree with the US placing a hegemony over international affairs around the world. so in my own opinion victory doesn't justify brutality.

and i still don't understand this "show them what not to do" idea about committing acts of brutality. the idea is to stop people from being so brutal to each other, but then you would go ahead and [b:521e2720c6]be[/b:521e2720c6] brutal. if you already know that it is a bad thing, why would you do it? why not just be [i:521e2720c6]less[/i:521e2720c6] brutal as we have been doing? we have not learned to refrain from brutality if we are just going to commit it again anyway. and in the name of showing people that it's a bad thing? that's absurd.

[wylin]

[quote:4bb72abcb1="SunWuKung"]well i don't agree with "might makes right". and i definitely don't agree with the US placing a hegemony over international affairs around the world. so in my own opinion victory doesn't justify brutality.

and i still don't understand this "show them what not to do" idea about committing acts of brutality. the idea is to stop people from being so brutal to each other, but then you would go ahead and [b:4bb72abcb1]be[/b:4bb72abcb1] brutal. if you already know that it is a bad thing, why would you do it? why not just be [i:4bb72abcb1]less[/i:4bb72abcb1] brutal as we have been doing? we have not learned to refrain from brutality if we are just going to commit it again anyway. and in the name of showing people that it's a bad thing? that's absurd.[/quote:4bb72abcb1]

yah, beats me man i took that theory from gundam. i just think its an interesting theory. my personal view is war should be brutal, fast, and effective. why limit urself to humane efforts just win and get it over w/ and rebuild and restore peace.

[AsianLatinaHottie]

WYLIN,
in regard to Russians being undefeated in war, didn't they have a war with Japan around early 1900's which resulted in a defeat and loss of land(and face) by Russia to the invading Japanese conquerors?

[wylin]

[quote:089f7589d6="AsianLatinaHottie"]WYLIN,
in regard to Russians being undefeated in war, didn't they have a war with Japan around early 1900's which resulted in a defeat and loss of land(and face) by Russia to the invading Japanese conquerors?[/quote:089f7589d6]

1Russo-japanese war, that was over some (today stil)l dispuited islands. and the fight was at sea. the russian navy got its ass kicked by the japanese. its where kamekaze comes from also the divine wind...sumthing happened w/ a typhoon and kept alot of the russian black sea fleet from joining in the conflict.

Land warfare is wat im talkin bout no ones ever been able to fight in the heart of mother russia cuz russians use scortched earth tactics. if the enemies coming they will destroy their own ppls food supply and farms b4 the enemy comes. so that the enemy has no onsite food sources.

[wylin]

revive old topic now that we' might be seeing a war soon

[achtungbaby]

Heh, nice bump:)

[wylin]

yeh well america's gonna face the aspect of urban warfare and large #'s of casualties. urban combat is messy and they might not be even able to win. Stalingrad showed the overwhelming german forces in WW2 urban combat is messy and costly 4 million german soldiers beat back by couple of skilled russian snipers and a leadership willing to repel the enemy at any cost of lives of soldiers or civillians.

[kimpossible]

Originally posted by wylin@Aug 30 2002, 10:16 AM
revive old topic now that we' might be seeing a war soon
do you mean with Iraq? I just wanted clarification.

[wylin]

yah pretty much i meant iraq