Good News Week
It's good news week,
someone's dropped a bomb somewhere
--Good News Week,
Hedgehoppers Anonymous
_______________
This is what passes as Good News for the U.S. today:
"Pakistani troops killed 80 militants and drove the Taliban from a major urban stronghold on Wednesday, the army said, as U.S. military planes brought aid for refugees fleeing fierce fighting across the northwest.
"One soldier was killed and nine seriously wounded as troops battled insurgents still holding several other towns in the neighboring Swat Valley, a military spokesman said (Pakistan Army Wrests Town From the Taliban.)".
An impressive kill ratio for the Paki Army, 80:1. It suggests a new strategy in the Phony War on Terror (PWOT ©) : subcontracting the war out to the crackerjack Paki Army. It would be cheaper and more effective than U.S. troops stomping around trying to scare up trouble.
This story seems a stretch. If the vaunted U.S. Army can't achieve an 80:1 kill ratio, how can the Paki's do it? How many of the killed were women and children?
"As part of that effort, two American military planes touched down on Wednesday at an
air base near Islamabad laden with supplies including air-conditioned tents and 120,000 pre-packed meals, the U.S. Embassy said."
80 bad guys dead and only 1.5 million refugees as a result of the action. And only $110 million in the immediate humanitarian aid; a bargain at double the price. Humanitarian aid = helping them after an army we support has destabilized them, removing any opportunity to carry on with their miserable lives.
The math: The U.S. delivers 120,000 meals to 1.5 million refugees. That means 1 of every ten gets one meal for one day. Now 1.5 million more people grasp the magnanimity of U.S. actions.
Reality: Even if the 80 dead were hardcore al-Qaeda elements, this does not justify the creation of 1.5 million refugees.
Labels: pakistan trumps u.s. army kill ration. paki's achieve 80:1 kill ratio, phony war on terror, PWOT
posted by rangeragainstwar at 12:42 AM
13 Comments:
At a ridicuously bare minimum it seems safe to assume that of that 1.5 million refuges 1% will now become hardened anti-American extremeists. So add 15 thousand new fighters to take the place of the 80 alledged fighters killed. Torture lovers everywhere can be proud of the accomplishment.
we will probably find, just as we did in the central highlands, that many of the refugees will bypass any local structures of retaliation and go straight for the closest thing they can find to regulars.
after tet, the VC were pretty much finished as a fighting force, but recruitment for the NVA was up and robust.
i imagine we'll see the same thing.
"after tet, the VC were pretty much finished as a fighting force, but recruitment for the NVA was up and robust"
Seriously, this is something I just don't understand, historically speaking, because by all rights the VC were done at Tet, but how did that correspond for a major victory for the NV?
That is something I'm still wrapping my head around, and if someone could explain it to me I sure as hell would appreciate it.
To all ,
It was actually the National Liberation Front that was effectively destroyed after Tet 68 of which the VC were an element. Small point BUT key is that killing people NEVER solves a problem. It's like spinal surgery, the problem just manifests somewhere else.
More and more I'm coming to believe and espouse that both COIN and Counter Terrorism Ops are totally meaningless and futile. Neither benefit America in any meaningful manner.
Historical point-The VC were better men than were the ARVN /SVN leadership. They fought for conviction rather than for money.
jim
MB, Jim: I have read and heard (from others who had BTDT) that part of the whole Tet fiasco was good old-fashioned fuckup on the part of COSVN. The VC just thought they were bigger and badder than they were, and that the average South Viet was more angry with the government of the RVN than he was.
But the other part of the story I've gotten is that there was some dirty doings at the crossroads. The government of North Vietnam and the NVA were playing a deep game. For them it wasn't just about beating the South and the U.S. - it was about making sure that the boss in Saigon took his orders from Hanoi, not from some bunch of Mekong Delta paddy farmer "people's heroes". So that the decision to leave the VC to hang out to dry involved a concious decision by Uncle Ho and his cronies to let the ARVN and MACV weed their little garden for them.
Always sounded plausible to me.
sheerahkahn:
the tet offensive was a major victory for nobody. to my thinking, and this is simply my thinking, it's open to change from more information, at best, it was a draw.
before tet we could effectively rely on control of around 25% of the territory of RVN. after it was finished, we had, after a hard fight, effective control of about 25%, mostly, the same 25%.
by the reckoning of sun tzu, a pretty reliable measure, draws go to the defenders. since we were not vietnamese, it wasn't a role we could assume without blushing.
the planners, and the commanders of the NVA were not pleased to be ordered into the offensive by the political leaders. from the start they were concerned with making a big news splash and pulling back before we had time to react strong enough to crush every head above ground level. many places they were simply mauled after initial successes.
even if there had been a resounding victory one way or the other, it wouldn't have mattered. there weren't any commanders on any side that knew how to follow through and exploit victory.
aside to jim: there are times when folks are a bit surprised at the close relationship i have formed with my chu hoi friend and his family. most of the VC i ran across were ruthless fighters, and worthy of respect.
Chief.
Yes COSVN and NVA were probably doing a dirty deal with the NLF. Not all elements of the NLF were Communist. Some were simply anti-colonialist nationalists but we didn't discriminate much as is the case in AFG/IRQ. Same game different century. Wow , I am showing my age.!
jim
MB,
I respect all the fighters that arrayed against the US forces in RVN. We fought them and killed the hell out of them but that doesn't mean that they weren't good and honorable men.
It's not necessary to hate one's enemies just because they're trying to kill you - we were doing the very same thing.
jim
one of the things that is done with beauty in the iliad is the way homer refuses to demonize or reduce the importance of the trojans, especially hector. in many ways hector is the main, and the most accessible of the characters.
achilles, while the best warrior has the maturity of a pampered #1 draft pick.
ajax has a prickley pride, and a touchy nature.
odysseus is too clever by half.
paris is a pretty boy.
priam is old and tired.
menalus is crude, and often proves to us why helen was glad to leave.
aggamemnon is a king, but not a fighting king. he is touchy in his sense of due honor, to the point of crippling his forces by pissing off fighters he needs desperately. he not only wanted tribute from achilles, he wanted achilles to mean it.
hector, he of the shining helm, stays loyal to himself, his gods, and his family.
everybody cries at the funeral rites for hector, breaker of horses.
Dear MB,
I wish you had been writing the Cliffs Notes for the Illiad!
Concise and insightful. And, you get the men-women thing re. crude Menalaeus :)
"Same game different century. Wow , I am showing my age.!"
Yes, you are, Ranger. Now, I, OTOH....
You guys discussing the NLF and the NVs brings back some old memories. I think you're right on. As I recall it, Hanoi often had issues with the boys in the south, specifically because many of the southerners weren't interested in being doctrinaire Commies. They just wanted to overturn the corrupt government.
An NLF-run SVN government might have been kind of interesting. No way Hanoi wanted to take a chance on that. If you'll pull out your old Commie handbook, you'll find it there: One of the first orders of business once your revolution of the proletariat is successful is to get rid of those who aided you along the way.
What! You can't find your Commie handbook? Shame on you.
Oh, and yeah, making lots of people who once had a fairly stable, albeit meager existence into refugees isn't the best way to win hearts and minds. You might see some of them again when you really don't want to.
Publius,
Greetings from Lake Tahoe.
I can't think of ANY revolution that didn't have a counter-revolution with the exception of the US experience , but even that produced a muffled version as many Tories left the country. The key point was that the FF's as revolutionaries were not later eliminated.
The NVA leadership eliminated their potential rivals before they won the war.This was a lesson from Stalin standing back and allowing the Nazis to destroy the Polish Resistance Army that would be problematic after the Soviets took over. It's actually rather simple.
I really hate to say this since so many good men died in RVN but a good nationalist govt would've looked pretty good as we look back. Sadly the SDS was saying this in 1968 and they were discounted as crazies. Is it possible the same craziness is happening today?
jim
strange how the first thing robin hoods tend to do when they leave the forest is to set themselves up as the new sherrif, and outlaw the folks that helped them to get there.
one of the things that i've always admired about our revolution was that it was one of the very few times in history where the revolutionaries didn't end things by turning on each other.
washington coming to congress and turning in his sword sent shockwaves all over europe. they couldn't believe that he would amass all that power, and simply disband the army and walk away.
many of our founders felt that a standing army, beyond a core of professional officers and noncoms, was a very real threat to our liberties.
seeing the paramilitary bent of la migra, the DEA, ATF, and how even podunk little towns now have SWAT teams and tanks makes me wonder if they weren't priescent and shit.
Post a Comment
<< Home