,

A Weak Army

How do the people who insist that the U.S. army is not in terrible shape explain the war in Iran? It’s been dragging out for months. There have been zero successes. If the army is good, why are the results so bad?

The only attempt to handle this contradiction that I’ve encountered so far is to say that the army is good, but its leadership is bad. This is ridiculous because army and its leadership are inseparable. What’s good about it if it’s not achieving any results?

Let’s leave aside for the moment the issue of whether the war was necessary. I don’t believe it was, but that’s not the point. Is this the army anybody wants defending them in case of an attack? With all of the money in the world, with all of the best science and technology, why is it so exceptionally unsuccessful against a smaller, weaker, more primitive regime?

The war was unnecessary. It was a big unforced mistake of the Trump administration, but since it already happened, can’t we try to learn something from what we’re seeing?

I have no idea how it is possible to sit on a conflict with Iran for half a century and fail to prepare for it to this degree. I also have no idea how it is possible to observe Iran actually wage war for the past four and a half years, as it has done in Ukraine, and not learn anything from the kind of weapons it very obviously and insistently uses. What kind of a “good” army fails to notice the rise of a completely new type of warfare spearheaded by the very country you’re attacking? A good army is prepared for the existing warfare. You can’t be a good army when you come out with muskets against machine guns. This is exactly what the US Army is doing in the war with Iran.

None of this would change if the war were completely justified. Let’s say, God forbid, that we need to fight a defensive war. How would we suddenly gain competence in drone warfare? Not that this army won anything before drone warfare was invented.

The US Army is like the US secondary education. Gigantic amounts of money are thrown stupidly at the issue, with predictably poor results. Maybe this is the unplanned purpose of the war with Iran. It’s a low-stakes conflict that finally makes us realize that urgent reform to the armed forces is needed.

5 responses to “A Weak Army”

  1. v07 Avatar
    v07

    Or another possibility is that we are objectively at the point (re weapons tech development) where weaker countries can make it prohibitively expensive for stronger countries to wage war against them. Especially if the weaker country is backed by another stronger country in terms of supplying weapons and intelligence information. In this sense what is happening in Iran is not that different from what is happening in Ukraine. Which by the way means that Russia and China want the US to get as stuck in Iran as Russia is in Ukraine.

    Like

    1. Clarissa Avatar

      What prevents the US from fighting drones with drones? Why is this tech development so one-sided and why is the US excluded from it?

      Leaving that aside, was tech development also to blame for Afghanistan, Iraq, Vietnam and everything else that the wonderful US army lost so pathetically for almost a century?

      This is not a situational problem. It has existed for at least 70 years.

      Like

      1. Clarissa Avatar

        As for the analogy with Ukraine, the United States is doing colossally worse in Iran than Russia is in Ukraine. Why? Can anybody explain this? Stupid Russia is on a different planet of effectiveness than the US against an enemy that can’t even reach the US. How is this possible? A trillion dollar budget buys us this? And Afghanistan? And Iraq? What sense is this making?

        Like

        1. oldcowboy3 Avatar
          oldcowboy3

          Kid, men measure everything. When enlistment commercials suddenly show white men instead of diversity bumpf, the hairs go up on the back of my hair ;-D

          Like

          1. oldcowboy3 Avatar
            oldcowboy3

            LOL, back of my head ;-D

            Like

Leave a comment