tactics and habits learned in counter insurgency doesn’t translate to running and operating an actual insurgency
Is that actually true? The habits aren’t useful, but knowledge of the tactics seems incredibly useful! As an example, there’s plenty of narcotics agents that become highly successful drug dealers because their experience gives them insights. This seems similar.
They’re trained to identify, track, and fight insurgents. Seems like that’s a set of transferable skills and can be turned into dodging identification, frustrating trackers, and fighting counter insurgents.
What in the world are you talking about? You can’t just make up claims because they sound right and affirm your stance.
The switch to counter insurgency oriented training began with the Vietnam war… which took place over 60-50 years ago. The disastrous counter insurgent performance of a military trained to fight the Soviets prompted a massive overhaul of US doctrine; especially as the prospect of war with the USSR became increasingly unlikely as the Union headed toward collapse. Actually, the effectiveness of the Afghans against the Soviets only intensified US military counter insurgency training and preparation.
Further, the vast majority of Usian veterans are overwhelmingly post-9/11 troops trained in counter insurgency operations before deployment to Somalia, Syria, Iraq, Afghan, Libya, and other nations where insurgency is the primary mode of combat.
I don’t know in what world you think the US abandoned Iraq, Syria, and Afghan in 2010. The army and national guard were rotating tens of thousands of troops into those nations continuously.
Most of these frontline infantry men have served in Iraq or Afghanistan any advice they give is going to be useless for whatever type of war you think you’ll be fighting 1) tactics and habits learned in counter insurgency doesn’t translate to running and operating an actual insurgency 2) the type of war they’re involved in is outdated 3) literally just train
This makes no sense. First, why would counter insurgency give you no understanding of insurgency. It’s two sides of the same coin. Second, some things about military training are just basic concepts, like how to manage a firearm, and don’t date fast at all. Third, “literally just train” line reminds me more of PvPers in a video game saying “git gud” than an understanding of RL logistics. Like… train in what? Based on whose experience? With what guidance? To what end? The whole point there was that some of them might have solid advice for training. Obviously they’re not the only people in the universe who understand related concepts, but my god, you’re really reaching on this narrative that there’s no circumstances under which they could possibly offer help.
First it was they’re too reactionary, now it’s “even if they aren’t too reactionary, their skills are still useless,” which is obviously nonsense.
Already talked about this
Do you really want to ally with someone who had a very good chance of having committed atrocities during their services regardless of if they felt bad about it? And even if they committed no war crimes why should we recruit them?
No you didn’t? I was responding to that part directly. As I said, “I would hope one is not basing their organization with others on probabilities of whether someone committed atrocities, rather than concrete information on whether they did and whether they have turned around as a person.” You literally said “a very good chance of”, not "people who are known to have done wrong. “A chance of” may be reason to be cautious, it is not investigation in itself. A person who committed war crimes is not the same as a person who committed no war crimes. You are uncritically assessing a situation, moving the goalposts to insist on a set narrative when it’s challenged, and generally misrepresenting logistics.
It’s not a hill worth dying on. I’m not going to insist someone trust imperial core veterans if they don’t want to and it’s up to peoples who have been harmed by them, as a collective, to decide in what capacity they want to be accepting of such veterans in general. You don’t need to trample over other reasonable points in order to have that stance.
So a USian is going to just hop over to Afghanistan and recruit former insurgents there, is that it? Yeah, it’s good timing for you to have an excuse to disengage. Your arguments are idealistic nonsense. You tell me to go outside, while ignoring logistical realities in favor of what sounds better to you on paper.
Conflicts are carried out with the tools that people and entities have available to them. That’s why Palestine is being genocided as we speak, instead of bombing israel with parity. It’s why Iran was able to bomb israel with parity when israel started attacking it. It’s one of the reasons we give critical support to anti-imperialist efforts, even when they aren’t explicitly socialist or communist.
I keep trying to introduce nuance into the conversation and you keep insisting on binary thinking. You are in desperate need of dialectics.
You didn’t show evidence of anything remotely resembling such a weighty claim as “veterans are a lost cause.” You made a sweeping generalization to start with. When I asked you about your sourcing, you said some of it’s talking to people, some of it’s content creators (such as streamers), and some of it’s a report on the ADF when the subject was USian veterans. I took the talking to people part as valid, in spite of it being anecdotal and me having to take you at your word. I questioned the validity of viewing content creators as representative of millions of people. I questioned the validity of the ADF report as being relevant to broad claims about USian veterans.
Here again, I give you nuance. And you give me more binary thinking: “veterans are a lost cause”.
Learn to put aside the ego and maybe you’ll be able to see straight on this. If you don’t, you are just going to be all anger with no center.
deleted by creator
Is that actually true? The habits aren’t useful, but knowledge of the tactics seems incredibly useful! As an example, there’s plenty of narcotics agents that become highly successful drug dealers because their experience gives them insights. This seems similar.
deleted by creator
They’re trained to identify, track, and fight insurgents. Seems like that’s a set of transferable skills and can be turned into dodging identification, frustrating trackers, and fighting counter insurgents.
deleted by creator
I find it hard to believe that they have literally zero training in counter insurgency. Nothing? At all?
I mean that’s funny if it’s true, no wonder insurgents keep winning lol
deleted by creator
What in the world are you talking about? You can’t just make up claims because they sound right and affirm your stance.
The switch to counter insurgency oriented training began with the Vietnam war… which took place over 60-50 years ago. The disastrous counter insurgent performance of a military trained to fight the Soviets prompted a massive overhaul of US doctrine; especially as the prospect of war with the USSR became increasingly unlikely as the Union headed toward collapse. Actually, the effectiveness of the Afghans against the Soviets only intensified US military counter insurgency training and preparation.
Further, the vast majority of Usian veterans are overwhelmingly post-9/11 troops trained in counter insurgency operations before deployment to Somalia, Syria, Iraq, Afghan, Libya, and other nations where insurgency is the primary mode of combat.
I don’t know in what world you think the US abandoned Iraq, Syria, and Afghan in 2010. The army and national guard were rotating tens of thousands of troops into those nations continuously.
deleted by creator
This makes no sense. First, why would counter insurgency give you no understanding of insurgency. It’s two sides of the same coin. Second, some things about military training are just basic concepts, like how to manage a firearm, and don’t date fast at all. Third, “literally just train” line reminds me more of PvPers in a video game saying “git gud” than an understanding of RL logistics. Like… train in what? Based on whose experience? With what guidance? To what end? The whole point there was that some of them might have solid advice for training. Obviously they’re not the only people in the universe who understand related concepts, but my god, you’re really reaching on this narrative that there’s no circumstances under which they could possibly offer help.
First it was they’re too reactionary, now it’s “even if they aren’t too reactionary, their skills are still useless,” which is obviously nonsense.
No you didn’t? I was responding to that part directly. As I said, “I would hope one is not basing their organization with others on probabilities of whether someone committed atrocities, rather than concrete information on whether they did and whether they have turned around as a person.” You literally said “a very good chance of”, not "people who are known to have done wrong. “A chance of” may be reason to be cautious, it is not investigation in itself. A person who committed war crimes is not the same as a person who committed no war crimes. You are uncritically assessing a situation, moving the goalposts to insist on a set narrative when it’s challenged, and generally misrepresenting logistics.
It’s not a hill worth dying on. I’m not going to insist someone trust imperial core veterans if they don’t want to and it’s up to peoples who have been harmed by them, as a collective, to decide in what capacity they want to be accepting of such veterans in general. You don’t need to trample over other reasonable points in order to have that stance.
deleted by creator
So a USian is going to just hop over to Afghanistan and recruit former insurgents there, is that it? Yeah, it’s good timing for you to have an excuse to disengage. Your arguments are idealistic nonsense. You tell me to go outside, while ignoring logistical realities in favor of what sounds better to you on paper.
Conflicts are carried out with the tools that people and entities have available to them. That’s why Palestine is being genocided as we speak, instead of bombing israel with parity. It’s why Iran was able to bomb israel with parity when israel started attacking it. It’s one of the reasons we give critical support to anti-imperialist efforts, even when they aren’t explicitly socialist or communist.
I keep trying to introduce nuance into the conversation and you keep insisting on binary thinking. You are in desperate need of dialectics.
deleted by creator
You didn’t show evidence of anything remotely resembling such a weighty claim as “veterans are a lost cause.” You made a sweeping generalization to start with. When I asked you about your sourcing, you said some of it’s talking to people, some of it’s content creators (such as streamers), and some of it’s a report on the ADF when the subject was USian veterans. I took the talking to people part as valid, in spite of it being anecdotal and me having to take you at your word. I questioned the validity of viewing content creators as representative of millions of people. I questioned the validity of the ADF report as being relevant to broad claims about USian veterans.
Here again, I give you nuance. And you give me more binary thinking: “veterans are a lost cause”.
Learn to put aside the ego and maybe you’ll be able to see straight on this. If you don’t, you are just going to be all anger with no center.
deleted by creator