Subject:
|
Re: Just been spammed by Paul Koelewijn
|
Newsgroups:
|
lugnet.general, lugnet.off-topic.debate
|
Date:
|
Mon, 21 Feb 2000 03:31:35 GMT
|
Reply-To:
|
Troy Cefaratti <(mnementh@nacs.net)SayNoToSpam()>
|
Viewed:
|
1099 times
|
| |
|
|
Bill Farkas <kfar@bellsouth.net> wrote in message
news:Fq3pFs.Cqn@lugnet.com...
> In lugnet.general, William A. Swanberg writes:
> > Having also been "in an armed conflict on foreign soil" (in fact, I was • in
> > the middle of Iraq with the 1st Cav while the Marines were still sailing
> > back and forth in the Arabian Gulf playing decoy, but I digress),
>
> This is an incredibly ridiculous statement. While the Army Airborne were • the
> first troops on the ground (with M16's only), everyone knows that the • Marines,
> thanks to the maritime prepositioning system, were the first fully • equipped
> armed contingent prepared to do precise and extensive harm. Everyone also • knows
> that the Marines occupied the forwardmost positions during the entire
> occupation. Everyone also knows why this is. Yes, there was a diversionary
> tactic in the beach landing scenario, but this illustrates, yet again, my
> point. Were the Iraqis concerned about the 1st Cav or the impending beach
> landing? Answer this for yourself. Regardless, this was a small decoy • force,
> the bulk of the Marines in theater were way out in front of any other • units and
> causing a whole heck of a lot more mayhem. I appreciate your pride in your • unit
> and branch of service but, again, everyone knows the truth about who the • top of
> the food chain is.
I must point out that your statement, especially the top of the food chain
part, is pretty ridiculous itself.
We still maintain 4 branches of service because all 4 branches are still
needed to effectively fight a war. There is not a single branch of service
that could fight a war on its own, no matter how much their duties overlap.
They are supposed to compliment each other.
Marines are usually the some of the first ones in. But then so are the
101st and 82nd airborn of the Army. And the Navy SEALS. These units are
DESIGNED to be the first ones in. The Marines are the only branch that have
a large amphibious force. The Airborn units are just that, airborn. All
their equipment can be airlifted. And the SEALs are masters of stealth.
I'd wager money that they were probably the first on the ground in Iraq.
But you'll never know that, because they were doing recon for those that
follow.
First in is not always the most important anyways. A heavy armored division
will never be the first in, but i'd like to see you win a major war without
armor. Navy warships will never be the first in (Unless they just happen to
be in the area), but i'd like to see you win a coastal war without them.
The air force will never be the first in, but i'd like to see you win a war
without their air support.
Sure, the navy/marines and the army have aircraft. They are used in direct
support of their troops. But that leaves the Air Force to do other things,
like strategic bombing.
As to who the Iraqi's were worried about, they WERE worried about a coastal
invasion or one through Kuwait. They SHOULD ahve been worried about the
ground troops massed deeply inland along their border with Saudi Arabia.
The fact that they weren't just proves that Gen. Shwartzkoph (sp?) had a
good plan. A plan that effectively use ALL branches of the service to their
best capacity to fight the war.
Troy
|
|
Message has 3 Replies:
 | | Please remember to post on-topic
|
| (...) OK, I think it's definitely time to get this thread _away_ from .general (it's gotten waaaay off-topic, and the original post wasn't really on-topic for .general in the first place). The best place to continue this current branch of argument (...) (25 years ago, 21-Feb-00, to lugnet.general, lugnet.off-topic.debate)
| | | Re: Just been spammed by Paul Koelewijn
|
| Actually, had you read the previous replies to the message you just replied to, you would see that most of this has already been covered. BTW, the 82nd had considerably more than just "their M16s" when they landed, as anyone who has had to hump a (...) (25 years ago, 21-Feb-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
Message is in Reply To:
54 Messages in This Thread:
 
- Entire Thread on One Page:
- Nested:
All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:
All | Brief | Compact
This Message and its Replies on One Page:
- Nested:
All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:
All | Brief | Compact
|
|
|
|
