Storm Surrge

JOHN THURSTON is back and eager to discuss Western Martial Arts, especially relating to its history.


Storm Surrge

Postby JOHN THURSTON » Sat Jan 27, 2007 11:26 pm

It seems the Democratic Party was the last one to realize they did not actually HAVE a plan for Iraq-or a way to implement if they did.

At this point i am Like Michael J. Fox---he'll support anyone who supports strem cell research.

I will support anyone who will get us an acceptable result in Iraq.

Sadly, (as predicted) the troops are not buying "we support you and what you're doing-----well-maybe not what what you are doing-um-really, but we love y'aal"

This is not a good frame of mind. This is the frame of mind that gets men killed.

""the folks at home don't support me---so I am just going to do as little as possible-and that very cautiously"

Let us remember the last rule of Chairman mao's Guerrilla warfare book---a final victory in the field (a la dien Bien Phu) or a forced withdrawal.

The Fighters in Iraq are a long way from pushing anyone anywhere---the Taliban may be closer to acheiving that end in Afghanistan.

Any thoughts?

"All Enlightenment Gratefully Accepted"
Posts: 2448
Joined: Sat Nov 28, 1998 6:01 am

Postby mikemurphy » Wed Jan 31, 2007 10:36 pm


It's the same old argument unfortunately. You may be right about the Democrats not having a plan to get out, but that was not their job. It was the commander-in-chief's job to have a plan/objective for what they want to do and when it is finished. He did not. He DOES not still, and his plan is to escalate the situation (ala Nixon) to higher levels (Iraq, Iran, Somalia). Where does it end???

As for MJF...I'm with you, and if I had his problems, I would probably think the same way.

As for the troops...I don't understand why people think that just because they put on a uniform and pick up a gun that their common sense suddenly goes awry. I have to believe the there are many that don't agree with what's going on and hope that GW get's us the hell out. They'll stay and do their job as they are ordered to, but that doesn't mean they agree with it. This is an argument of the leadership and it's ideology, not the men who are enforcing his bonehead policies.

Posts: 989
Joined: Mon Oct 05, 1998 6:01 am
Location: Randolph, MA USA 781-963-8891


Postby JOHN THURSTON » Thu Feb 01, 2007 7:32 pm

Although Soldiers in a professional army are 'pledged' to be non politital, this is not practicable.

Further, my notion was that the executive branch was limited to utilizing the professional troops on hand, and that if more were needed, it would require conscription and popular/congressional support.

If, on the other hand, Congressional support was availaible for something on the order of a declaration of war, better get a declaration as then opposition to the war would be very difficult legally.

My though being simple: If the threat is great, and the support sufficient, then anti war movements should be illegal, a declaration mirrors this support and, in a way, 'forces' the country through the low spots.

Conversely, if the support to get a declaration is lacking, or the judgement to obtain one not made when it could have been obtained, then you must play with the deck stacked against the conflict.

So I am with Mike in this respect.
Last edited by JOHN THURSTON on Mon Feb 19, 2007 12:35 am, edited 2 times in total.
"All Enlightenment Gratefully Accepted"
Posts: 2448
Joined: Sat Nov 28, 1998 6:01 am

The Troops

Postby Norm Abrahamson » Thu Feb 01, 2007 7:56 pm

I admit that I never served in the military, so I don't claim to be an expert on the way soldiers think and act. However, I just finished an interesting book by just such an expert. It is "Beyond the Band of Brothers" by Dick Winter. Major Winter was a platoon leader and then commander of Easy Company, a PIR (Parachute Infantry Regiment) from D-Day through the end of WWII. He saw a tremendous amount of action in some extremely hard fought campaigns. (Easy company was the focus of the HBO series, "Band of Brothers.)

Major Winter was pretty convincing that while the military goals of the country and army were important, it was his desire not to disappoint his fellow soldiers that was the real driving force behind his actions. He made the decisions that he thought would result in his men having the best possible chance to successfully and safely complete a mission. It was his comrades in arms that were his principal motivation, not politics or policy. He felt that attitude was widespread among the men with whom he served. If that is still the prevalant attitude among the military today, I'm not sure that political infighting will have much of an effect on how soldiers perform their duty.

I would love to hear from someone who has served in the Gulf Wars who could comment on whether that is true.


Norm Abrahamson
Norm Abrahamson
Posts: 283
Joined: Tue May 22, 2001 6:01 am
Location: Mansfield, MA USA

They All Statrt With the Rhetoric

Postby JOHN THURSTON » Mon Feb 19, 2007 12:04 am

Hi Norm:

As noted I did not serve. However my observations are the same.

That having been said I can only recall the qoute: "We're entering Germany soon and things will be getting tough" (G.S. Pattonj) and unverified GI was reported to have said "sure, if the Krauts were closing in on New York, we'd be getting tough"

So, personally, I think that 'cause' does motivate, just not as much as not letting your buddies down.

Perhaps Wars start with causes, and are fought for one's buddies

But it has been said that when a soldier in the field has no motivation, he plays it safe---or so he might think---but, being cautious is a matter of degree.

In Ancient times, to turn and run meant an easier road to getting cut down.

This fact remained true through civil war times, I think.

I have already placed my "my service disclaimer' online.

My friend who was working on the house here servied in Nam and the first Desert Storm and sort of mirrored this weighting towards not letting one's buddies down.

But a lack of 'cause' may lead to what some writers call: "The Garrison Mentality". I suppose that may arise when an entire unit goes sedentary for any number of reasons. Then one is supporting one's buddy in a very different way.

This is only supposition.
"All Enlightenment Gratefully Accepted"
Posts: 2448
Joined: Sat Nov 28, 1998 6:01 am

Return to Western Martial Arts & History

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 0 guests