From newshub.ccs.yorku.ca!torn!cs.utexas.edu!sun-barr!ames!elroy.jpl.nasa.gov!nntp-server.caltech.edu!godzilla.quotron.com!barry Wed Sep 16 21:23:17 EDT 1992
Article 6902 of comp.ai.philosophy:
Xref: newshub.ccs.yorku.ca comp.ai.philosophy:6902 rec.arts.sf.misc:3138 alt.cyberpunk:1646
Newsgroups: comp.ai.philosophy,rec.arts.sf.misc,alt.cyberpunk
Path: newshub.ccs.yorku.ca!torn!cs.utexas.edu!sun-barr!ames!elroy.jpl.nasa.gov!nntp-server.caltech.edu!godzilla.quotron.com!barry
>From: barry@godzilla.quotron.com (Barry Geipel)
Subject: Re: 21st Century Soldier
Message-ID: <1992Sep14.144617.21842@godzilla.quotron.com>
Organization: Quotron Systems, Inc.
References: <1992Sep10.172333.4545@oracle.us.oracle.com> <1992Sep10.194805.6289@linus.mitre.org> <11SEP199211572401@dstl86.gsfc.nasa.gov>
Date: Mon, 14 Sep 1992 14:46:17 GMT
Lines: 45

In article <11SEP199211572401@dstl86.gsfc.nasa.gov> olson@dstl86.gsfc.nasa.gov (Paul Olson) writes:
>
>Everyone should remember that we can win a few battles, 
>but unless we are willing to fight on the enemies terms, we will still lose the
>war.  
HUH? You should never be willing to fight a war on the enemies terms! Throughout
history the victor has been the one with the initiative. In the case of
the Gulf turkey shoot, the Coalition high tech and their unwillingness 
to fight a frontal "over the top men!" war (the Iraqi terms) gave 
the Coalition the initiative.

>Iraq worked a fixed set stance.  Our air power was able to kick the snot
>out of them (besides their not willing to fight).  What would have happened if
>they decided to fight a guerilla war?  Our air power would have been
>meaningless against small fire group teams.  How effective was our air power in
>Vietnam?
>
>Dr. Forbin

Guerilla war??? in the desert... how would that be possible. TE Lawrence and
Company. were able to conduct one in WWI, but only with the help of the 
British,only along the Red Sea coast (so the could be supplied) and only by 
jumping between watering holes ( one GBU or tomahawk per hole and thats all 
folks! ).  (The scene in Lawrence of Arabia where they cross the Nafu desert 
is totally ficticious...)

Also remember that the Iraqi army was designed around Soviet doctrin. You
can't go guerilla with a T-72 MBT Battalion ( or even a single tank ). If
the Iraqi's had gone guerilla, the outcome would have been the same. Most
of the heavy "offensive" equipment would have been destroyed in place, Kuwait
would have been taken (Kuwait City at a higher price) and the Iraqi's would
have no offensive capabilities left... Same result, fewer Iraqi casualties.
Only Kuwait City would have produced more Coalition casualties.

But all this is academic. Hardware does not win wars, people do. The fact
is that the quality and morale of the Coalition soldier was much higher
and the average Iraqi soldier did not want to be there (even before the
Coalition started the air war... A soldier that does not want to be there
would make a very poor guerilla fighter.

-- 
==========================================================
Barry L. Geipel            || 
INTERNET:barry@quotron.com || Lacking a muse, my mauser
COMPUSERVE:710055,3726     ||  must be my  thunderbolt


