TMc: Low Tech Enemies | Eastern North Carolina Now


    The US Army can train an infantry man in 10 weeks after a 10 week boot camp. When given a $1500 automatic rifle and $200 worth of ammo, he is ready for jungle warfare. The army must now build a base near the war zone and transport the soldiers. Tour of duty and vacation schedules must be established. Many civilians may object to the draft.

    The RNC and DNC promised to eliminate our low tech enemies but envision the use of high tech weapons. Good luck with that.

    Countries like the USA with low birth rates need high kill ratios. In Vietnam the goal ratio was 10 to 1. So, for each American casualty, it was necessary to inflict 10 Vietnamese casualties. In WW2 families like my mother's had 10 kids...5 boys and 5 girls. Two boys were young enough for the draft. One was wounded D-day. One to One kill ration was okay.

    Enemies practicing polygamy are a special problem when a combatant has 5 wives and 20 sons.

    Conclusion: Low tech enemies are troublesome because of face to face contact with low cost weapons. It is easy to blow up a town but then soldiers must enter the rubble to find the enemy.

    I wish we could return to the days of soldiers in formation meeting on designated battle fields and slugging it out while civilians watched from hill tops...the good old days.
Go Back


Leave a Guest Comment

Your Name or Alias
Your Email Address ( your email address will not be published)
Enter Your Comment ( no code or urls allowed, text only please )



Comments

( August 7th, 2016 @ 6:06 am )
 
Here is a short Video with some History of the Cu Chi Tunnels

beaufortcountynow.com
( August 3rd, 2016 @ 1:46 pm )
 
What a name - Chesty Puller.

He has a role in the HBO miniseries, "The Pacific". I think he was a Lt. Colonel when the war began at Wake Island and in the Philippines.
( August 2nd, 2016 @ 5:36 pm )
 
Somewhere I heard or saw the quote that a good military general should be kept behind glass with a "break glass in case of emergency" sign next to a hammer. I am an extremely strong believer in civilian control of the military. However, once committed, we should stand back and let them work, because it is going to be messy. Most good military combat leaders are terribly politically incorrect but effective. That is why we had better be sure we have the public's approval before undertaking military solutions. George H.W. Bush did that with the liberation of Kuwait under Storming Norman Schwarzkopf who passed in 2012 at 78. The American people are an impatient group and protracted operations are bound to lose their support.

The best example of that is Chesty Puller, the legendary Marine combat leader, who is quoted as saying when he came to a base to inspect a unit "Take me to the brig, I want to see the real Marines."
( August 2nd, 2016 @ 12:25 pm )
 
Vietnam was political FUBAR; fighting a war that we were not prepared to win, employing good military principles that we were unprepared to defend.

Can you imagine if a U.S. President had turned a General Douglas MacArthur, or a George S, Patton loose on Charlie?

It would have saved lives, and the World would be far safer today.

What if Ronald Reagan had been president with both or either of those two generals?

But Lyndon Johnson was no Ronald Reagan.

Even William Westmoreland and Curtis LeMay would have flourished under better political leadership.
( August 2nd, 2016 @ 11:22 am )
 
The difference in WWII and Vietnam was that the WWII was a campaign-oriented event whereas Vietnam was a daily event. Most Grunts spent their whole 12 months in the field. Only officers spent the 6 in and 6 out. I was fortunate to only spend 8 in and 4 back in the rear with the gear. But it really makes no difference on the length. One (1) 'good' firefight was enough to induce a lifelong legacy. I am not trying to nick pick, but I have spent a good portion of my research time trying to reconcile fact from my own internalized myths.


Here is a good summary of the A New Generation of Combat Stress

"One example of the level of combat stress can be roughly defined between those who served in World War II and Vietnam. For a combat soldier in World War II who served for four years, the average time spent in actual combat was approximately 40 days. By comparison, Grunts in Vietnam spent an average of about two-thirds of their 12- or 13-month tours – over 250 days – in combat."

www.military.com
( August 2nd, 2016 @ 7:31 am )
 
PTSD in VN was minimized by short (1 Yr) combat duty. Usually, 6 mo. field and 6 mo administrative assignments (mail room, etc). The new replacements were then facing an enemy with 20 years combat experience (Japan, France, then USA). This long war (8 years) produced too many Vets for a system designed for standard wars (4 years). That is my opinion.
( July 31st, 2016 @ 3:43 pm )
 
I do not see how any good decent, Christian American could go to war and not suffer from PTSD.

Our generation was raised to be a good, kind people. It is our mothers' fault, and that is a good thing for our souls, our wounded spirits.
( July 31st, 2016 @ 10:18 am )
 
Well thanks, but I have not always felt that way. It was obviously the most trans-formative period in my life, but after that I saw the solution in the mirror every morning. It may sound strange, but you have to embrace your past for good or bad.
One of my old veteran buddies put it in perspective. We were talking and I told him I did not suffer from PTSD. His response was "You may not but I'll bet your family does."

It really hit home when I saw No country for old men. I keep this video on my play list for YouTube. It never fails to straighten me out.

Skip to 4:36 for the best lesson in life I have had recently

Self-pity is nothing more than Vanity. Even Hollywood gets it right from time to time.

beaufortcountynow.com
( July 31st, 2016 @ 9:15 am )
 
I swear Bobby Tony, you certainly have the best attitude concerning your days "in the shit", even weaving in a allegorical message about capitalism.

I guess to absorb all that horror, one just has to find the humor in it.

If anyone wondered why I acted so weird when I came off the county commission after 18 years, it was probably the PTSD ... until the humor kicked in, and it kicked in real hard.

I hope you won't find that bit of levity as patriotic sacrilege. You know how much I admire you Vietnam War Vets, those Vets before you, and now those Vets that come after you - like you and your brave buddies - keeping us safe here in the homeland.

Like fighting in Vietnam, in a wildly unbalanced measure, my now whimsical years on the commission have taught me what we both should agree on in this one truth: I don't want to ever do that again!
( July 31st, 2016 @ 6:56 am )
 
You are right Stan, my memory may be a bit cloudy, but I don't remember Sir Charles as always smiling and he certainly did not have a concrete tunnel and name tag. But we did leave one good legacy there. Maybe there is a way to make a buck from this. Clean up the tunnels and sell tours. Based on the blue name tag I would say he was a republican.

I always maintained that our greatest accomplishment was showing the Vietnamese how to exercise pure capitalism, which they did with abandon. Why else would I buy an American beer for $1.00 from the kid on the Lambretta. We helped them develops a strong sense of entrepreneurship. It's a shame we cannot do the same in this country.
( July 30th, 2016 @ 11:16 pm )
 
Never seen Charlie so happy. Must be a fine tunnel.



That's Awful! Vietnam War, War, Small History, In the Past, Body & Soul I Like Words but Many of Them I No Longer Understand

HbAD0

 
Back to Top