Stan187

I don't see how French history is relevant anymore anyway. We are not talking about the bloody campaigns that they've committed themselves to in history (God knows Napoleon's march thru Russia was bloody). But as of right now, they do not have the willingness to fight a war and take heavy casualties. None of the Europeans have that kinda willingness and public support.

You could argue that the United States doesn't have the political will to do so either. Its true in most of the developed world nowadays. The public does not tolerate casualties like they used to. Look at Vietnam, and how long it took for those big demonstrations to get going, and GIs were dying by the hundereds daily. Just like in France's case, bloody history of imperialism/colonialism/military action or whatever else, is becoming less relevant. The public is not willing to take casualties like they used to.

Perhaps the French could be fierce warriors if their government and public were willing to fight, but the only thing they'll really fight for is when people threaten the French homeland directly. Even then, its kinda questionable.

Parihaka

They'll fight, and fight dirty, if it's in their interests to do so, if there is a profit to be made. They surrendered in WWII, but the free French were the hardest bunch of bastards there. Algeria made Iraq look like a waltz. They'll bomb and kill whenever it suits them and if you underestimate them you're in trouble.

Parihaka

Exactly, just as they're aligning themselves with Iran, Syria and hizbullah now. There's gold in them thar sand dunes.....
And they don't think the US has the depth.......

Stan187

Oh I definitely think that they're willing to bomb an kill for their interests, everyone is. I'm just saying I don't think they're willing to incur heavy casualties in the process and continue.

Stan187

As far as peacekeeping goes, when learning about it I learned that there was one very important inaliable principle of peacekeeping: neutrality.

I question the neutrality of most of the contigents, ESPECIALLY those rat French bastards.

Officer of Engineers

That's a myth. Ground realities are completely different. At best, we play both sides against one another. "Behave or we'll step aside" or "Back off or we'll join the fight."

More often than not, the local PK contingent chooses the side of the locals. No real choice in the matter. It's their homes that we're staying in.

Don't expect the UN to win the war for Israel when the IDF themselves can't do it.

__________________
Chimo

Parihaka

If you survive here for any decent length of time, ask Officer of Engineers about CIA spying on behalf of the Bosnians whilst he was with UNPROFOR.
There is no such thing as neutrality and as America demonstrated then, they were quite happy to supply intel. and possibly arms to forces directly in conflict with both the Canadian and British UN forces.

Stan187

I realize that they are not going to be neutral in any case, I was more saying in a relative manner. All I'm trying to say is, that if the UNIFIL was disarming Hizballah, no Israeli overflights would be necesarry. This is just a point of principle. Obviously, UN troops are not going to disarm anyone, and I never expected that. But then again if it was me, I would have never sent them in there to begin with.

As far as UN fighting a war that the IDF couldn't win, I think that is a bit simplistic Sir, and I know that your position is more nuanced than that. The IDF I think could win against Hizballah. However, the IDF does exist in a vacuum. It is linked with the political situation, namely a weak government. I think the IDF could defeat Hizballah (at least to a large extent), but would suffer numerous casualties of course. The same thing I said about casualties, and the lack of willingness of the public to stomach them, applies to Israel just as well as any other developed nation.

Stan187

Am I about to get banned or something?

Confed999

Yes, the allies of the future Empire are lining up with their hands out. It will bite them, just as it did 65 years ago... Sooner or later...

__________________
No man is free until all men are free - John Hossack
I agree completely with this Administration’s goal of a regime change in Iraq-John Kerry
even if that enforcement is mostly at the hands of the United States, a right we retain even if the Security Council fails to act-John Kerry
He may even miscalculate and slide these weapons off to terrorist groups to invite them to be a surrogate to use them against the United States. It’s the miscalculation that poses the greatest threat-John Kerry

Parihaka

Not as far as I'm aware, depends whether you can keep your head or not

Officer of Engineers

UNIFIL was just an excuse to allow the IDF to retreat with honour.

How long was Israel in Lebanon before finally couldn't stomache the losses anymore? Let's not forget the disaster that was called the South Lebanon Army. This last invasion was obviously because of the UN's failure to prevent a Hezbollah build up and action. To expect the UN to succeed when it is its failure that prompted this Israeli failure is in itself simplistic.

Let's not do a revisionism. We can examine and debate the details but the fact is that Israel lost this one. There is some shame and your pride is hurt. Swallow it and learn where you went wrong. There is no better teacher of humility and battle tactics than failure.

The fact was that Israel was the one who started this war under conditions that did not allowed victory. Whether misjudgement, ill-informed, poor soldiering, bad luck, or just the coffee was bad, these things have to be examined with one goal in mind - to understand the defeat. To ignore the defeat or gloss over it with other accomplishments (such as the OPOBJs were achieved) would ignore the lessons altogether.

Stan187

Perhaps maybe you can better explain your stance on Israel be so soundly defeated, cuz that's what I'm reading. Articles that I've read seem to point to that as media sensationalism to an extent.

here is a link to one I thought was good, perhaps you can tell me different:
http://www.washingtoninstitute.org/p...icyFocus60.pdf

Officer of Engineers

I would not call it "so soundly defeated." After all, they've accomplished their OPOBJs. It was ugly the way they've accomplish them but they did accomplish them.

No, my point here is that what they thought was the Hezbollah's centre of gravity (a guerrilla force ready to retreat in the face of a superior enemy) turned out to be wrong. Once they realized what they were facing ("An Iranian Division"), they pressed on with their original plan instead of stepping back to regroup and reassert.

The Hezbollah did the one thing the IDF did not expect. They offerred battle.

In the end, that's the only kind of victory there is. All soldiers know is that they're still alive after the shooting has stopped. In other words, that's another war the Israelis lost - the PR War. If you studied the Vietnam War, you know how important that war is.

My thanks for the link. It pretty well sums up what I was trying to say.

Stan187

Yeah I agree with loosing the PR war, it seems like neither Israel or the US can win a PR war in today's world.

If there are any other articles on the subject that are relevant, I'd ask you refer me to them.

Oh and Colonel, I think we'd all appreciate it if you could tell us more about your peacekeeping experience.