Author Topic: Killing German Ground Crews?  (Read 1784 times)

Offline E25280

  • Gold Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3475
      • http://125thspartanforums.com
Re: Killing German Ground Crews?
« Reply #45 on: April 21, 2008, 08:32:16 PM »
We lost in Korea.
I didn't realize Korea had been unified under Communist rule.   :huh
Brauno in a past life, followed by LTARget
SWtarget in current incarnation
Captain and Communications Officer~125th Spartans

"Proudly drawing fire so that my brothers may pass unharmed."

Offline evenhaim

  • Gold Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3329
Re: Killing German Ground Crews?
« Reply #46 on: April 21, 2008, 08:41:08 PM »
I didn't realize Korea had been unified under Communist rule.   :huh
I didnt realize war could be won or lost.
Freez/Freezman
Army of Muppets
I could strike down 1,000 bulletin board accounts in 5 seconds.
You want ownage, I'll give you ownage! -Skuzzy
I intend to live forever - so far, so good.

Offline Hornet33

  • Gold Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2487
Re: Killing German Ground Crews?
« Reply #47 on: April 21, 2008, 08:43:41 PM »
The Korean war isn't over, it's just been sitting there under a cease fire for the last 50 years. That's why the UN still has a multi national force in place in South Korea.
AHII Con 2006, HiTech, "This game is all about pissing off the other guy!!"

Offline GtoRA2

  • Persona Non Grata
  • Plutonium Member
  • *******
  • Posts: 8339
Re: Killing German Ground Crews?
« Reply #48 on: April 21, 2008, 08:46:09 PM »
Laser always comes off like a squeaker when he talks history.  ;)

Offline lasersailor184

  • Plutonium Member
  • *******
  • Posts: 8938
Re: Killing German Ground Crews?
« Reply #49 on: April 21, 2008, 08:48:24 PM »
Are the communists still ruling on the Korean peninsula?  Yes?

Then that means we lost the korean war.

Sometimes the missteps in logic around here are astounding.
Punishr - N.D.M. Back in the air.
8.) Lasersailor 73 "Will lead the impending revolution from his keyboard"

Offline E25280

  • Gold Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3475
      • http://125thspartanforums.com
Re: Killing German Ground Crews?
« Reply #50 on: April 21, 2008, 08:56:28 PM »
Quote
United Nations Security Council Resolution 82, adopted on June 25, 1950, recalling General Assembly Resolution 293, which found the Government of the Republic of Korea to be the lawfully established government over the area that the United Nations Temporary Commission on Korea found to constitute Korea. The Council noted with grave concern the attack on the South by North Korea. The Council determined that this action constituted a breach of the peace and called for the immediate cessation of hostilities. The Council further called upon North Korea to withdraw their armed forces to the 38th parallel. The Council then requested the United Nations Commission on Korea to communicate its recommendations on the situation, observe the withdrawal of North Korean forces from the 38th parallel and to keep the Council informed on the execution of this resolution.
Sorry, I missed the part that says removal of the North Korean government was the official goal of the war.

Brauno in a past life, followed by LTARget
SWtarget in current incarnation
Captain and Communications Officer~125th Spartans

"Proudly drawing fire so that my brothers may pass unharmed."

Offline Hornet33

  • Gold Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2487
Re: Killing German Ground Crews?
« Reply #51 on: April 21, 2008, 08:57:54 PM »
Is the democraticly elected government still ruling on the Korean peninsula?? Yes?

That means we won the Korean war??

Right back at ya.


Once again that war has never been concluded. North and South Korea are still technicaly at war. They have been under a cease fire.
AHII Con 2006, HiTech, "This game is all about pissing off the other guy!!"

Offline rogwar

  • Silver Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1913
Re: Killing German Ground Crews?
« Reply #52 on: April 21, 2008, 09:07:06 PM »
If they were wearing the uniform then they were fair game. War is true hell on earth....

Offline Charon

  • Gold Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3705
Re: Killing German Ground Crews?
« Reply #53 on: April 21, 2008, 11:12:33 PM »
Quote
It seems to be well said.  He's well spoken.


But of course, he leaves out an important point.  An EXTREMELY important point.


We lost in Vietnam.  We lost in Korea.

Korea wasn't 4th generation warfare. It was the last, basically conventional war we fought on such a scale. However, it wasn't an industrial  total war either, given Korea's limited manufacturing base. And, the fact that the commies had the A-bomb, that whole MAD thing I noted, prevented it from being a total war at the sources of production inside the Soviet Union and China. I believe MacArthur lost his job over that point, and we're alive to post on this message board as well.

Vietnam was a combination of conventional war and 4th Generation warfare. But, as with Korea the sources of production were in the Soviet Union and China for the conventional aspect. And, the fact that the commies had the A-bomb, that whole MAD thing I noted, prevented it from being an industrial total war at the sources of production inside the Soviet Union and China. And, we did a fairly poor job of winning the hearts and minds leading to failures on the 4th generation front in keeping down the support for the insurgency in the south. I rather think if we had put our will to it we could have won the conventional aspect, but would have wound up where we are today in Iraq after "Mission Accomplished<tm>."

Quote
Fourth generation warfare (4GW) is combat characterized by a blurring of the lines between war and politics, soldier and civilian, peace and conflict, battlefield and safety. The military doctrine was first defined in 1989 by a team of American analysts, including William S. Lind, used to describe warfare's return to a decentralized form. In terms of generational modern warfare, the fourth generation signifies the nation states' loss of their monopoly on combat forces, returning in a sense to the uncontrolled combat of pre-modern times. The simplest definition includes any war in which one of the major participants is not a state but rather a violent ideological network. While this term is similar to terrorism and asymmetric warfare, it is much narrower. Classical examples, such as the slave uprising under Spartacus or the assassination of Julius Caesar by the Roman senate, predate the modern concept of warfare and are examples of the type of combat modern warfare sought to eliminate. As such, fourth generation warfare uses classical tactics—tactics deemed unacceptable by the preceding generations—to weaken the advantaged opponent's will to win.


Lind is a smart guy. He has a lot of insightful stuff to comment on over at SFFT.

BTW, in either of the above scenarios targeting civilians would make sense if it would break their will to fight. However, I believe history has determined that is hard to accomplish and, in the case of Vietnam (and now Iraq) a disastrous policy for the 4th generation aspects.

Here are two of his perspectives:
Air strikes and 4th generation warfare
http://www.sftt.org/cgi-bin/csNews/csNews.cgi?database=DefenseWatch%202007.db&command=viewone&id=172

This is a perspective on our nearness to victory in Iraq (in 4th generation terms)
http://www.sftt.org/cgi-bin/csNews/csnews.cgi/csNews.cgi?database=homeWilliamLind12008.db&command=viewone&op=t&id=9&rnd=467.0628257725822

Charon
« Last Edit: April 21, 2008, 11:33:14 PM by Charon »

Offline LTARGlok

  • Probation
  • Copper Member
  • **
  • Posts: 218
Re: Killing German Ground Crews?
« Reply #54 on: April 22, 2008, 06:56:36 AM »
Korea wasn't 4th generation warfare. It was the last, basically conventional war we fought on such a scale. However, it wasn't an industrial  total war either, given Korea's limited manufacturing base. And, the fact that the commies had the A-bomb, that whole MAD thing I noted, prevented it from being a total war at the sources of production inside the Soviet Union and China. I believe MacArthur lost his job over that point, and we're alive to post on this message board as well.

Charon

MAD really did not yet truly exist at the time of the Korean War.   The United States still had a HUGE advantage in nuclear weapon stockpiles at that time.   A nuclear exchange would have definitely resulted in a defeat for both Russia and China, even in the worst case scenario.   However, the cost would have been so high that the victory would have been rather Pyhrric in nature.  The amount of radioactivity released into the upper atmosphere by just the American nuclear weapons alone would have had devastating effects to the ecology of the entire planet.   Although scientists really did not yet fully understand such consequences back then.

But the United States would not have been destroyed, while China and Russia would clearly have been.   So it would not have really been MAD yet.   China had no nuclear weapons themselves yet, so they could not have retaliated.  Would the Russians have then attacked if only China was struck, knowing that they then faced annihilation themselves?   That is really a tough one to judge.   Stalin would have been crazy to have done so.   But who knows, maybe he would have?

MacArthur's plan called for 29 Atomic Bombs to be dropped along the Korea/China border, which he said would effectively "isolate" the battlefield, creating a nuclear wasteland that would have effectively sealed off North Korea from resupply.   While Truman rejected this plan, as the war dragged on, and Eisenhower was elected President in November of 1952 promising to end the war, nuclear weapons did play a major role in eventually ending the combat.

According to published reports, on May 19 1953 the Joint Chiefs of Staff recommended direct air and naval attacks on China that included the use of nuclear weapons, in order to bring the stalemate to an end.  The very next day, the National Security Council endorsed the JCS recommendations.   Eisenhower still held out for a negotiated settlement, however. 

Secretary of State Dulles traveled to India at that time, and past on a communication to the Chinese through Nehru that if speedy progress was not made in peace talks towards an end to fighting, that the United States would begin attacks on China.   However, he allegedly made no threat in that communication of Nuclear Weapons being used, as the Joint Chiefs had recommended.   Although there are some historians who believe that Eisenhower may have actually done so.

The United States had a big nuclear weapons advantage at that point in the war in terms of firepower, as we had already begun deploying much more powerful Hydrogen Bombs, while Russia had yet to even test its first Hydrogen device.  The US had also already begun a major escalation of the air war in North Korea that May, and later into June.  On May 13th 1953 the Toksan Dam was destroyed by a dramatic strike by 58th Fighter-Bomber Wing.   Three days later, the Chasan Dam was also destroyed.  This resulted in the destruction of over 13,000 acres of planted rice fields, and many miles of both roads and railways.  Because experts had felt that the loss of these key irrigation systems could lead to massive civilian starvation, they had not been previously targeted earlier in the war.

As the war dragged on into June of 1953, the air battle reached its peak of the entire war.   On June 15th, 910 combat sorties were flown against North Korea in a single day. 

So this all needs to be taken into context, when you consider that the armistice was signed just a month later that July.  The United States was clearly ratcheting up its attacks, and threatening to do much more if the fighting did not end.   And with this all being directed by a new President who had been one of America's greatest military leaders, it was no longer in the interests of either China or Russia to continue the fighting.

And many folks do not even realize that Eisenhower deployed many nuclear weapons in South Korea starting in 1958, almost 5 years after the fighting had ended.   He did that to emphasize to the communists that any renewed fighting in Korea would quickly go nuclear in nature if they ever chose to attack South Korea again.  At its peak, there were 450 total nuclear weapons deployed, and they were not totally withdrawn from South Korea until 1991.   

I personally believe myself that it was fear of America's nuclear might that both brought the fighting to an end, and also prevented it from ever flaring up again.

.

Offline Shuffler

  • Radioactive Member
  • *******
  • Posts: 27321
Re: Killing German Ground Crews?
« Reply #55 on: April 22, 2008, 08:46:35 AM »
total war or not, it sickens me what we "humans" are capable of,
nothing changed, just look around today, same hate, same breed.


Yup but it is necessary to stop folks like hitler............
80th FS "Headhunters"

S.A.P.P.- Secret Association Of P-38 Pilots (Lightning In A Bottle)

Offline lasersailor184

  • Plutonium Member
  • *******
  • Posts: 8938
Re: Killing German Ground Crews?
« Reply #56 on: April 22, 2008, 06:05:40 PM »
Is the democraticly elected government still ruling on the Korean peninsula?? Yes?

That means we won the Korean war??


By that logic we should have stopped the moment that Allied forces hit the german border.
Punishr - N.D.M. Back in the air.
8.) Lasersailor 73 "Will lead the impending revolution from his keyboard"

Offline E25280

  • Gold Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3475
      • http://125thspartanforums.com
Re: Killing German Ground Crews?
« Reply #57 on: April 22, 2008, 07:16:35 PM »
By that logic we should have stopped the moment that Allied forces hit the german border.
:huh  So, you never heard Roosevelt utter the words "unconditional surrender"?
Brauno in a past life, followed by LTARget
SWtarget in current incarnation
Captain and Communications Officer~125th Spartans

"Proudly drawing fire so that my brothers may pass unharmed."

Offline E25280

  • Gold Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3475
      • http://125thspartanforums.com
Re: Killing German Ground Crews?
« Reply #58 on: April 22, 2008, 07:19:33 PM »
By that logic we should have stopped the moment that Allied forces hit the german border.
Better yet, I guess since we didn't occupy London in the 1700's, we lost the Revolutionary War too.  And we didn't occupy Berlin in 1918, so we lost World War I.  And we lost the Spanish American War, since we never went to Madrid.  And . . .
Brauno in a past life, followed by LTARget
SWtarget in current incarnation
Captain and Communications Officer~125th Spartans

"Proudly drawing fire so that my brothers may pass unharmed."

Offline Mr No Name

  • Silver Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1835
Re: Killing German Ground Crews?
« Reply #59 on: May 23, 2008, 11:01:26 AM »
I have and will always will state that any weapon or any tactic you can use to disable or kill an enemy and take away his will to fight or support the war effort is a valid one... Kill sailors,soldiers, marines,airmen, ground crews, food supplies, fuel lines, lawyers, doctors, nurses, lemonade stand workers...  WHATEVER just win the war as fast as possible
Vote R.E. Lee '24