RE: Vietnam and modern combat

--- DAWGFACE47@webtv.net wrote:

> mostly they fight for themselves, their mates, and
> their unit, rarely if

Very true.  On the other hand, they join for a variety
of reasons, and those who join for idealistic reasons
(majority of the kids we have gotten since 9/11/01)
tend to, IMHO, make better Joes.

> short of a no holds  barred and winners write the 
> history conflict, or
> a payback is a bitch combat  environment  there are
> always gonna be
> those damned	rules of  engagement  that always work
> to the advantage of
> your	enemy. . . .

Lots has changed in the past 34 years.	I can't answer
this in detail, but let me repeat what our Brigade
Staff Judge Advocate always said during our Law of War
briefings.

"At no time are you authorized to get killed for lack
of shooting back.  If you feel threatened, shoot the
guy.  If anyone has a problem with it, it's my job to
come up with the legal reasoning for you."

Our ROE, in its entirety, fit on the front/back of a
3"x5" card.

You have to remember that you were serving at the
absolute lowest point in the US Army's history.  We
had our historically worst:
Equipment
Training
Soldier quality
Leadership quality
Motivation
Drug usage rates
Desertions
Fratricide
etc, etc, etc.	
Further you were working for a prez that had no
respect for the military (oddly enough. . . ) and
overruled/ignored/never asked for advice from his
senior military leadership.  Unclear mission with
impossible political constraints.  This does not
normally happen.

This is certaintly not the case today.	I do not think
you would recognize the Army today.

John

	
		
__________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
Win a $20,000 Career Makeover at Yahoo! HotJobs  
http://hotjobs.sweepstakes.yahoo.com/careermakeover