Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

An alternative American Cold War Strategy

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • #31
    Imagery & Propaganda Mihais Reply

    "...if anyone else would have been in your shoes,WMD's would have been found in Iraq.Any sort of WMD's"

    Well...we don't have the genius of Sergei Eisenstein working on our behalf but I'll speak to our commissar at the Ministry of Information about this right smart-quick. Yup...

    "This aggression will not stand, man!" Jeff Lebowski
    "The only true currency in this bankrupt world is what you share with someone else when you're uncool." Lester Bangs

    Comment


    • #32


      nice song but what it's got to do with iraq ?
      J'ai en marre.

      Comment


      • #33
        1979 Reply

        "nice song but what it's got to do with iraq ?"

        What's Iraq got to do with an alternative American Cold War strategy?

        In other words,

        "Why ask why?"
        "This aggression will not stand, man!" Jeff Lebowski
        "The only true currency in this bankrupt world is what you share with someone else when you're uncool." Lester Bangs

        Comment


        • #34
          Originally posted by S-2 View Post
          "nice song but what it's got to do with iraq ?"

          What's Iraq got to do with an alternative American Cold War strategy?
          specify time frame ,please.

          Originally posted by S-2 View Post

          In other words,

          "Why ask why?"
          the song mihais posted was writen before the german invasion of USSR :)
          J'ai en marre.

          Comment


          • #35
            BF,the Westerners agreed in the end to play by the opponent's rule.The Westerners set their stop-loss too tight.I'm not ignoring the insurgents efforts,nor their political acumen.But without the full cooperation of a significant part of the Western societies,their efforts would have meant zilch.

            There is also truth that not even the ''natives'' weren't always united in a common cause.The blacks in Rhodesia,for example didn't support the ZANU&ZAPU in significant numbers up until 1976-1977.The Algerian FLN was a spent force by 1958 and it gained some new life after proeminent French public figures talked about Algerian independence.Not even worth bothering reminding the cooperation between the insurgents and the Western leftists(at least in the Algerian case that played a major part in the ultimate victory of the FLN).
            With the doubtful benefit of hindsight,better(read,more favorable to the European powers&the West) solutions were available,as opposed to full retreat,ethnic cleansing of white settlers and the new nations getting in the Eastern bloc's influence(outcomes predicted by the opponents of the retreat at the time).
            BTW,we Commies ,didn't behaved much nicer with them compared with the ole imperialists.Not that I actually lose sleep over it.

            p.s As a curiosity,military history isn't studied as a part of the broader field of history?Which needs sometimes to be integrated with the rest(economic,social etc...).I'm asking because I've noticed that at least at Univ. of Bucharest (GF is a history graduate there)there is 0 interest on the matter.There's a ''history'' of everyone and everything but war.That is only for barbarian fascists(like me).
            Those who know don't speak
            He said to them, "But now if you have a purse, take it, and also a bag; and if you don't have a sword, sell your cloak and buy one. Luke 22:36

            Comment


            • #36
              Clarification.I posted the nice song,precisely because it's nice.

              It's also a timeless protest against vile imperialism. The other side can be so much better for the starving & oppressed peoples of the world(I hope you guys don't take me for real on this)
              Those who know don't speak
              He said to them, "But now if you have a purse, take it, and also a bag; and if you don't have a sword, sell your cloak and buy one. Luke 22:36

              Comment


              • #37
                1979 Reply

                "the song mihais posted was writen before the german invasion of USSR :)"

                And B.F.'s comment about Bush exceeds the cold war's ending by 12 years. Height of Pax Americana...:)

                We've been in decline since owing to self-imposed constraints WRT focused and directed violence.
                "This aggression will not stand, man!" Jeff Lebowski
                "The only true currency in this bankrupt world is what you share with someone else when you're uncool." Lester Bangs

                Comment


                • #38
                  A leader with balls.

                  Originally posted by zraver View Post
                  Examples of what might have been include Yugoslavia after the Tito-Stalin split.
                  Now that was a guy who actually had testicles! How was he able to tell Stalin to back the f*** off and threaten him with death if he did not comply?

                  Too bad that Tito did not have a contingency plan to manage the break-up of Yugoslavia - or at least discourage it.

                  Comment


                  • #39
                    Originally posted by S-2 View Post
                    "Bush minor sorta messed things up with the whole 'oops, no WMD' war in Iraq"


                    Now Iraqis are free to choose whom they'll kill.
                    ...which is not the point I was making.

                    Had no issue with the war, but the way it was justified will make it harder for the next Admin that wants to do the same thing - just as the way the US got into Vietnam did the same a generation earlier. The politics matter.
                    Last edited by Bigfella; 31 May 10,, 22:17.
                    sigpic

                    Win nervously lose tragically - Reds C C

                    Comment


                    • #40
                      Bigfella Reply

                      "Had no issue with the war, but the way it was justified will make it harder for the next Admin that wants to do the same thing"

                      Path of least internal political resistance stemming from perception of imminent threat coupled with endorsement of such from foreign intelligence agencies.

                      I have mixed views of that reading. I see a latent WMD capability and desire even in the absence of overt evidence. I see it now meaningfully neutered for the foreseeable future but, then, I'd have marched to Baghdad in 1991 and certainly have made war over the subsequent multiple cease-fire violations. Either provided adequate moral justification. One lacked a diplomatic mandate and the other lacked collective determination. That's just lil' ol' me though.;)

                      Doing otherwise and avoiding such was disingenuous and cowardly for all-not just America. OTOH, had we done so in 1991 or the interim I confess to believing a full post-Saddam occupation then would have been handled no better than subsequent events revealed.

                      Some bad regimes just need to go. Period. As the list is long but the means short, those most endangering global strategic security move to the top. North Korea is interesting as they are tucked away in a isolated corner of the world and surrounded by four major military powers along with us.

                      Perversely, that provides great opportunity for mischief when calculated correctly. To date, they've done so and managed not to drown in the process. At some point I think they'll cross the threshold of diminishing returns that compels military operations however distasteful.
                      "This aggression will not stand, man!" Jeff Lebowski
                      "The only true currency in this bankrupt world is what you share with someone else when you're uncool." Lester Bangs

                      Comment


                      • #41
                        Originally posted by Crocodylus View Post
                        How was he able to tell Stalin to back the f*** off and threaten him with death if he did not comply?
                        http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Percentages_agreement
                        J'ai en marre.

                        Comment


                        • #42
                          Originally posted by Mihais View Post
                          BF,the Westerners agreed in the end to play by the opponent's rule.The Westerners set their stop-loss too tight.I'm not ignoring the insurgents efforts,nor their political acumen.But without the full cooperation of a significant part of the Western societies,their efforts would have meant zilch.
                          The Western powers involved were faced with a price higher than they were prepared to pay. To a large extent this price was exacted on the battlefield. The threat of having to continue paying a price to maintain their positions forced a withdrawal. Why exactly should thay have continued to kill, die & spend huge amounts of money to keep their colonies? I'm yet to see a good answer & many French & Britons couldn't at the time. America spent billions & threatened its ability to carry out much more important missions (such as defending Europe) for the sake of saving the RVN. A price worth paying? Again, many Americans didn't think so. Many Australians agreed.

                          There is also truth that not even the ''natives'' weren't always united in a common cause.The blacks in Rhodesia,for example didn't support the ZANU&ZAPU in significant numbers up until 1976-1977.The Algerian FLN was a spent force by 1958 and it gained some new life after proeminent French public figures talked about Algerian independence.Not even worth bothering reminding the cooperation between the insurgents and the Western leftists(at least in the Algerian case that played a major part in the ultimate victory of the FLN).
                          With the doubtful benefit of hindsight,better(read,more favorable to the European powers&the West) solutions were available,as opposed to full retreat,ethnic cleansing of white settlers and the new nations getting in the Eastern bloc's influence(outcomes predicted by the opponents of the retreat at the time).
                          BTW,we Commies ,didn't behaved much nicer with them compared with the ole imperialists.Not that I actually lose sleep over it.
                          Most of those 'better' solutions involved being aware of the threats the future held before there was any need. It would have meant the colonizing powers (in 2 cases) being prepared to grant independence (or something close) much earlier than they did & in much different circumstances. The brutality that the British & French needed to use to suppress the FLN & Mau Mau pretty much guaranteed that those powers would not be able to continue governing their colonies. It also gave the Soviet bloc a foothold that they might otherwise have had to work harder for. America backed the wrong horse in the late 1950s & never really got ahead of the game after that. Trying to blame the political left simply won't wash - it is WAY more complex than that (look at the role of the extreme right in the Algerian mess, for instance - it was prepared to sacrifice democracy to maintain a colony).

                          p.s As a curiosity,military history isn't studied as a part of the broader field of history?Which needs sometimes to be integrated with the rest(economic,social etc...).I'm asking because I've noticed that at least at Univ. of Bucharest (GF is a history graduate there)there is 0 interest on the matter.There's a ''history'' of everyone and everything but war.That is only for barbarian fascists(like me).
                          Military history is too specialized & of interest to too few people. History is struggling to keep up enrollments as it is. Milhistory as a stand alone subject would most likely struggle - especially when you consider that most arts students are female & milhistory is an overwhelmingly 'boys own' subject. There are plenty of subjects that touch on military history & there are still historians in major departments who mainly focus on military stuff, but outside Military institutions it will only ever be a niche subject.
                          Last edited by Bigfella; 02 Jun 10,, 08:51.
                          sigpic

                          Win nervously lose tragically - Reds C C

                          Comment


                          • #43
                            Originally posted by S-2 View Post

                            We've been in decline since owing to self-imposed constraints WRT focused and directed violence.
                            Perhaps is nothing more than a mater of perception...
                            J'ai en marre.

                            Comment


                            • #44
                              Originally posted by zraver View Post
                              More we should have backed what were really nationalist movements rather than true communist movements.


                              Ho was an ally, all we had to do to keep him was not ship French troops back to Indochina and stood by our claim that all peoples deserved self determination. Like Washington and Tito, Ho earned the title father of his country. Ho's communism was more anti-colonialism and land reform in the beginning.
                              It is a shame that US didn't understand that earlier. It would have prevented a lot of countries from calling US imperialistic.





                              Originally posted by zraver
                              Originally posted by BigFella
                              I would agree that Iran & India present some intriguing prospects, as do a series of left wing governments & movements in Latin America. The longstanding policy of supporting the likes of Pakistan over India has struck me as one of the most foolish & shortsighted policies America has adopted. backing dictators in Pakistan has brought little but grief & dissolution to that nation, while backing India's democracy would not only have set a fine example, but it might have given the US more influence among the 'non-aligned' bloc, which tended to be left-leaning for fairly obvious historical reasons.
                              Bingo
                              To be fair, India didn't exactly help itself when it so soundly condemned US, Britain, and France for invading Egypt and failing to do condemn USSR when it invaded Hungary or Czechoslovakia. It may have cemented ties to USSR but it irrevocably pushed US firmly into Pakistan's camp and damaged India's credentials with other non-aligned nations and tainted the Non-Aligned as a whole.

                              Comment


                              • #45
                                Originally posted by Blademaster View Post

                                To be fair, India didn't exactly help itself when it so soundly condemned US, Britain, and France for invading Egypt and failing to do condemn USSR when it invaded Hungary or Czechoslovakia. It may have cemented ties to USSR but it irrevocably pushed US firmly into Pakistan's camp and damaged India's credentials with other non-aligned nations and tainted the Non-Aligned as a whole.

                                US was firmly into Pakistan's camp by 1965 war , the list of military hardware supplied includes:
                                (100) M-4 Sherman Tank (1948) 1950 (100) Ex-US
                                1 Hiller-12/OH-23 Raven Light helicopter 1951 1952 1
                                (150) M-24 Chaffee Light tank (1953) 1954-1955 (150) Ex-US
                                (50) M-41 Walker Bulldog Light tank (1953) 1954-1955 (50)
                                (80) F-86F Sabre Fighter aircraft 1954 1956-1958 (80) Ex-US; modernized before delivery; 'MAP' aid
                                40 F-86F Sabre Fighter aircraft (1954) 1957-1958 (40) 'MAP' aid
                                (26) M-115 203mm Towed gun (1954) 1955-1958 (26) Ex-US
                                (345) M-47 Patton Tank (1954) 1955-1960 (345) Ex-US
                                (30) M-59 155mm Towed gun (1954) 1954-1956 (30) Ex-US
                                (150) M-7 105mm Self-propelled gun (1954) 1955-1956 (150) Ex-US
                                (15) T-33A T-Bird Trainer aircraft 1954 1955-1956 (15) Ex-US; 'MAP' aid; no. could be 32
                                8 Adjutant Minesweeper 1955 1955-1963 8 'MAP' aid
                                (300) M-101A1 105mm Towed gun 1955 1955-1957 (300) Ex-US; aid
                                4 HU-16B Albatross MP/transport ac (1956) 1956-1957 (4) Ex-US; SA-16A SAR version
                                (25) M-36 Jackson Tank (1956) 1958 (25) Ex-US
                                6 RT-33A T-Bird Reconnaissance ac (1956) 1957 6 'MAP' aid
                                8 S-55/H-19 Chickasaw Helicopter 1956 1958 8 For SAR; 'MAP' aid
                                60 O-1/L-19 Bird Dog Light aircraft (1957) 1957-1958 (60) Probably ex-US (but maximum few years old); 'MDAP' aid
                                4 S-55/H-19 Chickasaw Helicopter (1957) 1957 (4)
                                (500) AIM-9B Sidewinder-1A SRAAM (1958) 1959-1963 (500) For F-86, F-104 and F-6 combat aircraft
                                26 Canberra B-57B Bomber aircraft (1958) 1959 26 Ex-US (but only few years old); 'MAP' aid; incl 2 B-57C trainer version
                                2 AN/FPS-20 Air search radar (1959) 1960 2 'MAP' aid
                                2 AN/FPS-6 Height-finding radar (1959) 1960 2 'MAP' aid
                                1 Bonanza Light aircraft (1959) 1960 1 Bonanza V-35 version
                                1 Navajo/ATF Tug 1959 1959 1 Ex-US; Paksitani designation Madadgar
                                (12) F-104A Starfighter Fighter aircraft 1960 1961-1962 (12) Ex-US; modernized before delivery; incl 2 F-104B
                                (60) M-114A1 155mm Towed gun (1960) 1960-1963 (60) Ex-US
                                (200) M-48A1 Patton Tank (1960) 1961-1964 (200) Ex-US
                                (10) T-6 Texan Trainer aircraft (1960) 1960 (10) Ex-US
                                4 C-130B Hercules Transport aircraft (1962) 1963 4 'MAP' aid
                                (6) HH-43B/F Huskie Helicopter (1962) 1963-1964 (6) For SAR; 'MAP' aid; HH-43F version
                                109 M-113 GAVIN :P APC (1962) 1963-1964 (109)
                                1 Mission Oiler (1962) 1963 1 Ex-US; loan until bought in 1975; Pakistani designation Dacca
                                2 Queen Air Light transport ac (1962) 1963 2 Second-hand
                                27 T-37B Trainer aircraft (1962) 1963-1967 (27) 'MAP' aid; T-37C version
                                (18) Bell-47/OH-13 Light helicopter (1963) 1964 (18) Ex-US; 'MAP' aid; no. could be up to 32
                                1 Tench Submarine (1963) 1964 1 Ex-US; Pakistani designation Ghazi
                                1 Twin Bonanza Light transport ac (1963) 1964 1 U-8F version
                                (50) Mk-44 ASW torpedo (1964) 1965-1966 (50)
                                (1) RB-57F Canberra Reconnaissance ac 1965 1965 (1) Ex-US B-57/RB-57 rebuilt to RB-57F

                                Not sure when India joined the USSR camp, but the 1965 war played it's part.
                                up to that point here is what they got from US.


                                (200) M-4 Sherman Tank (1951) 1952 (200) Ex-US; $19 m deal
                                (5) T-6 Texan Trainer aircraft (1951) 1951 (5) Ex-US; probably modernized to T-6G before delivery
                                6 S-55/H-19 Chickasaw Helicopter (1952) 1954 6 S-55C version
                                26 C-119G Packet Transport aircraft (1954) 1954-1955 26 'MDAP' aid
                                (30) T-6 Texan Trainer aircraft (1955) 1956 (30) Ex-US; T-6G version
                                4 Bell-47/OH-13 Light helicopter (1956) 1957 4 Bell-47G-2 version
                                2 S-55/H-19 Chickasaw Helicopter (1956) 1957 2
                                12 Bell-47/OH-13 Light helicopter (1960) 1961-1962 12
                                (28) C-119G Packet Transport aircraft (1960) 1961 (28) Ex-US
                                2 S-62A Helicopter 1960 1960 2 For evaluation and VIP transport
                                24 C-119G Packet Transport aircraft (1962) 1963 24 Ex-US; aid during border war with China
                                2 DHC-4 Caribou Transport aircraft (1962) 1963 2 Originally ordered for US armed forecs but transferred to India as aid during border war with China

                                After that, almost nothing ( some Hughes light helicopters in the early seventies )
                                Last edited by 1979; 14 Aug 10,, 08:50.
                                J'ai en marre.

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X