Saturday, July 3, 2010

American Soldier, Now and Then

Bookmark and Share

3 Comments:

Anonymous Anonymous said...

This sort of post displays just how delusional and insulting you truly are. American soldiers are better armed than any soldiers on earth. And yet those "18th century tribesmen" -- did they have IED's and car bombs and machine guns in the 18th century? -- are able to kill numbers of them. Like they killed my nephew's buddy over there. So *SPARE* me and all of us this sort of BS. The point of any army is to establish superiority over the enemy. As we can afford better armor and arms for our soldiers, we do. So what? Get a life, or a brain.

~An American

11:09 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Now, maybe I was truly too hasty and you meant nothing wrong in your post. Maybe you meant *only* that the American revolutionaries were tougher than the modern soldier. Did you?

Here's why I doubted that and why I inferred something more insidious in your post. First, on account of the general tenor of this blog, which is to say nothing in favor of contemporary military operations or circumstances. So context drove much of my response above. You should know that such posts are not self-apparent in their point. For instance, I would not be quick to say that the American revolutionary was tougher for the reasons listed. The very professionalism of the British Army meant that fighting them was generally not like fighting insurgents hiding in houses and mosques, who don't wear uniforms, who set booby traps, and melt into a civilian body. Fighting in those circumstances can be much worse than fighting in serried ranks on a battlefield. There's really no easy way to infer from one's armor and arms whether one is tougher or not. The fighting in Iraq and Afghanistan is much more stressful than in America during the Revolution, so I'd say that modern fighters are tougher fighters.

If you posted this in the invidious spirit that I inferred above, you deserve what I wrote above. If you posted it without *any* aspersions cast on contemporary soldiers, then I take back the hostility, but not the point: the sort of reasoning in that pic is wrong. It takes into account only the quality of supplies and from that makes inferences about the quality of the fighter, an evaluation that ignores other factors, like the intensity of the fighting. It also grossly underestimates the nature of the enemy. Thank you.

~An American

11:24 PM  
Blogger The Western Confucian said...

I meant it in honor of the soldiers in the War of Independence, as did the soldier who made it and the milblogger who posted it.

Some Americans react to any questioning of our wars or militarism as militant Muslims react to cartoons of Muhammad. The Founders would be appalled.

1:15 AM  

Post a Comment

Links to this post:

Create a Link

<< Home

Omnes Sancti et Sanctæ Coreæ, orate pro nobis.