• Mossberg Owners is in the process of upgrading the software. Please bear with us while we transition to the new look and new upgraded software.

How about mercenaries in Iraq/Syria?

Tom396

Tom396

.30-06
I know many folks have no more stomach for us committing US ground troops to foreign wars, but how about just spending the cash to send mercenaries? Got qualms about that too? The b*st*rds are going to keep on killing until they move on to the next target, the continental United States. Personally, I'd rather engage them over there than over here.
And before you suggest it, nuking them would only make things worse for us. When nukes start flying, willy-dilly, nobody wins. I doubt any middle eastern nuking by the US would go without response from some other nuclear power. Take care. Tom Worthington
 
I would not doubt if there are more than a few contracted forces at play in these areas already and we will never hear about it or know they are/were there unless they do something really stupid, and then it will most likely be covered up. This is purely speculation of course based on how I've seem the gov act in the past and watching Bourne movies. ;-D
 
I say nuke the scumbags....and if anyone else want to even think of a retaliation, nuke them too....screw all this pc shit. It's time to go back to the old school way.

push the damn button already.

You kill one of us, we kill 100,000 of them....
 
One really strong show of force would do a lot to stop this, there are always rumblings when a weak leader is in power. Kids know when there is no authority in the house.
 
Bill Clinton was on this morning saying "The US cannot win a land war in Iraq." BS. Of course we can. In about 30 min. from the time the
4249809778_00841a85b3.jpg
is pushed. :rolleyes:
 
We "COULD" win a war in Iraq. Or anywhere else in the world we wanted to go.

But you would have to do a lot more butt kicking than has been done in the last 50 years.

You would have to go after them and mean it.

The U.S. didn't help win WW1 and WW2 by being pussies about it. We went balls in with the INTENTION of killing as many of them as we could and damn the consequences. It was about SURVIVAL. Not political convenience.
 
It is not in any politician's best interest to win any war quickly. The more prolonged, the more they stand to make.

Sending Mercs in would be a great idea except for one flaw...

...once we screwed them over they would head here to finish the fight. Which, on second thought, might not be a bad thing.

SEND IN THE MERCS!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
 
OhioArcher said:
It is not in any politician's best interest to win any war quickly.
Click to expand...

Not true. Although a modern leader (politician) often thinks so, it's very short sighted. In reality, a lengthy war serves only to deplete the nations resources and turn the populace against the leader, which inevitably leads to his downfall. We have seen this in the past few years. Note Obama's falling approval numbers, and the poor state of our economy.

Sun Tzu made this plain, and his advice still pertains to this day. A wise leader, who is concerned with his own longevity and the welfare of his nation, will prosecute a war as quickly as possible. By doing so, he will preserve the treasure of the country, and earn the loyalty of the people. Obama has failed on both counts.

Any Marine fire team leader understands this. Boils down to "Git 'er done", or suffer the consequences.
 
I posted about this same exact topic on another forum about 6 months ago, when the IS cockroaches were first advancing into Iraq and atrocities were becoming well known. Send in a squadron or two of A-10 Warthogs to annihilate the equipment and operators, then ask for VOLUNTEERS to go in and mop up on the ground, all of which would be paid for by Iraq. I don't think there would be any lack of volunteers, AT ALL! So the USAF (for a fee) would provide air support for the hired "mercs". I let my elected officials know how I felt.

Although a Libertarian, I am a world capitalist, and if the greatest armed forces in the world (US) can make a buck being the "world policeman" than why not? We have thousands of highly trained soldiers that would jump at the chance because that is what they know and love. I don't really want to pay (as a taxpayer) for thousands of costly missiles and smartbombs to assure a country's freedom and if they have oil revenues, we'll just bill them. Nor do want our soldiers to have their hands tied having to follow military protocol--a merc that takes no prisoners would be far more effective!

Now it is simply too late and the blame rests entirely on the shoulders of the loser in the WH, Nobama! (1) because he removed troops from Iraq and (2) because nothing was done when they first entered Iraq. To remove IS now will require FAR MORE resources than we ever imagined.

IS is entrenched in many Iraq cities and have control of many resources. They are beheading US citizens to provoke us. Then when we finally go in and "pin-prick" bomb them, there will most certainly be civilian casualties, regardless. Then the weenies of the world will be shocked and the US will be the "bad guy"... You know what? BFD! There needs to be carpet bombing of strongholds and if civvys die, who gives a fark! They should not have allowed the cockroaches into their cities with no resistance like cowards.

These people need to be ruled with an iron fist, as Saddam did. None of this "touchy-feely" nation-building that was such a failure. (rant over!)

PS: Headlines I'd like to see: "Michelle Obama takes out the president, vice-president, second lady and herself in twisted murder-suicide pact!" OR "AirForce One collides with AirForce Two in tragic air accident! Debris land on AG Holder's motorcade!"
 
Last edited:
GunnyGene said:
Sun Tzu made this plain, and his advice still pertains to this day. A wise leader, who is concerned with his own longevity and the welfare of his nation, will prosecute a war as quickly as possible. By doing so, he will preserve the treasure of the country, and earn the loyalty of the people. Obama has failed on both counts.
Click to expand...

Preserving treasure and making treasure are two different things entirely

Sun Tzu wasn't a politician as we know them today. There are so many back door deals and so much money to be made from prolonging war that it does not make it conducive to end it quickly for politicians, arms manufacturers for instance make politicians rich ........this has been going on since the conclusion of WW2.

Any political war is driven off money, making it and preserving it. All wars since WW2 have been political wars, they find a half good reason to "save the world" as an excuse.

The grunt knows to get it done, the grunt is a pawn. His bosses are pawns, their bosses stand to make promotions, their bosses make a shit ton of money and further their careers

The money being made runs so deep that it is down to the companies that make primers for ammunition.......the propellant change in 5.56 NATO during Vietnam was a political decision because the manufacture of that propellant was in with politicians and there was a lot of money to be made.
It gave the M16 a bad rep, it caused malfunction in the rifle that caused the death of that grunt trying to " get r done".
But the military didn't address the true problem, they messed with the gun instead of the propellant, chrome chambers, buffer weight, tougher bolts, different tolerances, the forward assist and so on trying to get that propellant to work while grunts died as their test went on.......just one of many many examples of politics in war

The leader ? Yeah it might hurt the leader but again the leader isn't the politicians that OA is talking about, The POTUS is the biggest pawn of them all, reputation expendable to the real politicians.

So you can equate this same theory to a great many things the Feds do, the drug war right down to suppressing wildfires on Federal lands.
If you look into most of the big destructive forest fire out west you will see one common denominator in most of them, they are on Federal lands.......why?. The imaginary line on the map isn't on the ground, the mountains aren't steeper, the wind doesn't blow harder, the fuels aren't worse.........why do Federal firefighters get "hazard" pay as soon as they see flames?..........when you get paid more money to see flames why would that motivate you to put out a fire?
Their funding is directly related to "how bad" the previous fireseason was, worse the season the bigger next years budget

It is so deep, wake up Gunny.......Sun Tzu couldn't even fathom how powerful and far reaching the Federal Government of the USA has become
 
Oli, I don't want to get into some kind of argument about whether or not Zun Tzu was a politician or not. He was the equivalent of our Chairman of the JCS, so although he was a military man he would also have been familiar with the politics of the time. I do think that he would have been familiar with the kind of thing you talk about, re: the money flow in defense industries. That was not unknown in ancient times. :)

I do recommend this book for a quick look at how ancient Chinese industry was run and organized. Back when I was in the business, I had lunch with the author a couple times. Very interesting man.

A History of Managing for Quality, by Joseph Juran.

http://www.amazon.com/History-Manag...0010&sr=8-13&keywords=juran#reader_0873893417
 
oli700 said:
details Gunny
Click to expand...

There's a lot that has been written about him. More than I could possibly repeat here. But his birth name was Sun Wu (some dispute about that), and he was a general, strategist, and philosopher, possibly the senior general, under King Helü of Wu in the late sixth century BC, beginning around 512 BC. Historians differ somewhat on the details, but his book translated as the "Art of War" (literal translation is: "Master Sun's Rules for the Army" ), and is one of 7 ancient Chinese texts that are still taught in Chinese and Western war colleges, and known as the Seven Military Classics. General Schwarzkopf is familiar with these, as are most senior officers.

There is more than one translation of the Art of War (and others) by different scholars but only in the details of some words in the original text, which used language that is difficult to understand in Western cultures because of the Taoist beliefs of the time.

Of course, the teachings in these works, much like those of other well known generals and conquerers such as Clausewitz, or Alexander, must be adapted to modern political and technological differences. But the foundations remain much the same.

As to ancient Chinese industry, they had a formal, regulated defense industry (as well as other industries) with formal and enforced quality and production standards that encompassed the entire production chain from mining to distribution of finished products. Contracts were let, money changed hands, people were fired (or executed) and promoted based on connections and performance of their factory/workshop. No different than today. This was developed as early as the Shang Dynasty around 1600BC. Many of the workshops employed over 1000 people, producing all the usual goods that were sold to the market or the govt/military. In Sun Tzu's time this was already well developed. Mass production of arms and ammunition, chariots, armor, etc. (bows, crossbows, bolts, arrows, swords, etc., was tightly controlled to specified standards, for interchangeability, etc. . When you consider that an army of 100,000 men, of which perhaps 10,000 would require 50 crossbow bolts each (documented in the book I referenced), you can see that standards for both the crossbow and the bolts would be critical high volume production not much different than a modern firearms or ammo company. Same for everything else needed to prosecute a battle, including logistics and political/diplomatic considerations.

Here's one translation of the Art of War, http://www.sonshi.com/the-art-of-war-translation.html
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top