What makes a military effective /pol/?
Being able to win against Vietnamese rice farmers would be a good start.
being fast and cruel when invading.
being slow and sneaky when defending
>>73649139
Leaves unit to their own devices. Less progressive policies is a fucking start
memes and diversity
>>73649139
Unity and discipline, both of which the establishment is trying to tear apart within our own ranks to make the new world order transition run smoother.
>>73649139
Morale and a strong military tradition.
>>73649377
How do you defend against insecticide?
>>73649290
Please, we beat them. Afterwards, we just left the country in the hands of incompetent gooks.
>>73649625
Thought the sign said nigger hall for a sec.
No women
>>73649290
Being able to win against a bunch of colonial farmers is another.
Action. Simple as that.
A military you don't use is no military at all.
>>73649774
FUCKING SHREKT
>>73649139
Order, hierarchy, and discipline. This will lead to good morale and an effective fighting force.
Ruthless violence and efficiency.
Fuck the Geneva convention and "war laws"
>>73649139
>>73649412
This to be honest you need strong NCOs and officers. You can't have soldiers be leaderless if someone gets greased.
>>73649139
To subdue the enemy without fighting.
>>73650091
That can come back and bite you in the ass though. If you take no prisoners then the enemy will just fight to the death instead. Making their job all the harder.
Tactics, training, equipment and leadership (civilian / military).
>>73650434
Lots of joes of losing trust on NCOs
NCOs are losing hope with officers
Officers are losing ground and time
Logistics
morale, organization, and talented NCO's.
>>73649661
A man can be completely destroyed, but not defeated.
You never beat them. You kept killing them, you kept bombing them, but you never got that victory.
>>73649139
Holding the initiative
>>73650641
this sounds like something out of dwarf fortress
>>73651090
Militarily we destroyed them. The common saying of a GI at the time was we never lost a battle but sill lost the war. Also Vietnam was shitshow from the start never should of gotten involved in the first place.
>>73649139
>For to win one hundred victories in one hundred battles is not the acme of skill.
>To subdue the enemy without fighting is the acme of skill.
>If you kill your enemies they win.
-Sun Tzu
>>73651371
Lol wut fuck off. The chief goal of any military conflict is to degrade the enemy forces by any means any thing else is secondary. -Clausewitz.
>>73651203
They achieved their objectives while you failed to achieve yours.
Don't be like that Kraut quoting k/d every time ww2 gets mentioned.
About getting involved though, i agree, never should have went into the damn war with crackhead soldiers whose goal is getting out alive rather than winning.
>>73650810
>Hiroshima and Nagasaki
The goal of any war is to win it as quickly as possible to prevent further loss of life. If people want to fight to the bitter end despite being destroyed then they deserve to be destroyed and wiped from existence.
>>73649139
The will of the fight, plain and simple.
>>73649139
Ensuring your soldiers are properly educated on the dangers of sexual assault/harassment and how to properly treat cold/hot weather injuries.
>>73651770
True but my point is that Vietnam was not lost by the US military. it was lost by the government the Military itself performed very well.
>>73649139
>Cheshire cat in the bottom left
>>73649139
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=k4Pd527GN48
Right in the War Feels
>>73652016
Agreed, when it came to the fighting at least. The discipline issues are well recorded though.
On a sidenote, the Vietnam war had the best music. Can't wait for Rising Storm 2 to mow down some yellow men in the black pajamas
>>73652454
True that but that's what you get with draftee's. and fuck yeah it did. Also RS2 looks sweet is it supposed to be like a new Battlefield Vietnam?
>>73651371
>>73651563
This is exactly the difference in philosophy the US ran in to. The gooks didn't care how many soldiers they lost as long as the bodies ended up on film.
They intended from the beginning to misdirect, confuse, and aggravate the US military leadership until they looked incompetent enough for the civvy govt to call the war off.
>>73652778
Yeah, basically.
Last i've read on it was 64 players on a server, USA gets napalm strikes and other cool shit, gooks get tunnels and booby traps.
Seems bretty good
>>73653255
Oh shit thanks for turning me on to this legit hadn't heard anything about it.
>>73649774
Maximum REKT
>>73649659
Evolution and adaptability.
>Bullets.
>Beans.
>Band-aids.
'40s memes aside: supply, communication, mewvment, combined arms, violence of action, initiative, unconventionalism, and good judgement from small unit leaders.
>>73649774
>>73649139
Experience
>>73649774
>>73654919
And discipline too.
Soldiers and officers should obey without questions
>>73649290
You were involved there with the French before the Americans.
>>73649774
>when my 'witty' countrymen get btfo.
this is what I get living on an island of faggots
>>73649139
>Manpower
>Technological superiority
>Lack of tactical restrictions
Pick two. You cannot win with just one.
The US loses its fight in the middle east because we're hampered by the UN and Geneva (no bombing civvies, no torturing POWs, etc), and we're not willing to take losses. Our tech is kick ass but that's all we have.
You can with with asymmetrical warfare + manpower. We did it against the brits. Or, you can win with total war + tech.
The bottom line is that you can't pussy foot around. It's war. Treat it like such and you'll win.
