Question of the month. Could the US fight a war like WWII again.

[Blitzkrieg]

Check out the demographics that won WW2 and see if it matches today.. add to that worthlessness of so many young "men" today..the answer is no

I ask any and all to google Audie Murphy and tell me we have a bunch of him, today

 

[ORHunter79]

No. Look at the kids.

I do everyday. I'm a recruiter for the Marine Corps. Media will have you believe that our younger generations don't have what it takes. There are plenty of young folks who I would, and probably will share battle space with in the future.

When bubblegum gets tough, Americans do what we always have. Win battles and leave politics to politicians.

Side note: there are plenty of people who have enlisted, not for self, but for country. A lot enlisted after 9/11 knowing the risks. And they performed great. It may not have been WWII, but the threat of death is still the same.

 

[The B]

Audie Murphy and tell me we have a bunch of him, today

We didn't have a bunch of him then, either.

 

[Blitzkrieg]

We didn't have a bunch of him then, either.

A lot more than now. My father was a WW2 vet BTW, and all my uncles. When things got wierd the family joke was "Are you scared?"

To encapulate I would say as a man who knew many of those men.. most young males today are not fit to tie their shoelaces in terms of sand

 

[huthuthike]

I ask any and all to google Audie Murphy and tell me we have a bunch of him, today

We have lots of young men that no one thinks will do well on a battlefield. We have even more young men that some people think are not worth training and we have a nearly limitless supply of young men that you may consider unfit for duty. Most of the men who fought in World War 2 did not train their whole lives to be soldiers, they were forced into it and they were supported by a nation of people who wanted them to stop being soldiers and come home.

 

[Blitzkrieg]

We have lots of young men that no one thinks will do well on a battlefield. We have even more young men that some people think are not worth training and we have a nearly limitless supply of young men that you may consider unfit for duty. Most of the men who fought in World War 2 did not train their whole lives to be soldiers, they were forced into it and they were supported by a nation of people who wanted them to stop being soldiers and come home.

I am anti war-for-conquest and false foreign "allies" but I must say I've known both types of men and I can speak with authority as to their natures. Have you, my friend?

 

[gearhead]

As a country, we lack the will to win a war. We're too busy humanizing the enemy rather than dehumanizing. I have a box of letters my grandfather sent home from the Pacific theatre. All the envelopes feature cartoons making fun of the Japanese and Germans that would be called extremely racist by today's standards. There are pictures of enemy dead butchered next to our smiling troops.

Fast forward 25 years to Vietnam. Dad's letters home weren't covered in cartoons making fun of the NVA. (Correct me if I'm wrong, but I believe we were trying the "hearts and minds" approach) The pictures didn't change too much though - enemy dead next to our smiling G.I.s - young men who ran the gauntlet for our country and survived.

Today we're still in a 10 year war, and apparently didn't learn too much from the conflict in Vietnam. The country as a whole has forgotten the war in the middle east, and for many the idea of supporting our troops was just a catchy slogan from the start. As a country, we're concerned with the rights and feelings of our enemies rather than destroying them. The wars are now planned by politicians rather than generals, and our troops suffer for it. I'm in the hooligan navy, and there's no shortage of dumb asses, officer and enlisted. My friends in other branches say the same. That doesn't mean, however, that our troops as a whole aren't capable. Given the ROEs and policies needed to win a war, I have no doubt that they would and could.

Many of my generation's failures are a result of a severe lack of parenting. most of that, in my opinion, is because of broken homes. Maybe the parents should have worked to fix their marriages rather than throwing in the towel. Maybe they shouldn't have let the television raise their children. maybe they should have had the testicular fortitude to talk about sex and drugs with their kids rather than leaving it up to the education system. Anyway, that's another topic all together. and maybe, just maybe, my generation should have been smart enough to know better before making so many careless decisions in life. (I'm not innocent, believe me. i've made my share of bad decisions too) The short answer is that no, I don't think we could fight and win a war like that again, but it's not any one group's fault. We all share the blame on this one.

 

[nwwoodsman]

Sonuvabubblegum... are you kidding me?......... you can seriously kiss my ***.

I'll have more anger to contribute later.

Let's be honest here. Why don't you tell us how you really feel?

 

[Blitzkrieg]

As a country, we lack the will to win a war. We're too busy humanizing the enemy rather than dehumanizing. I have a box of letters my grandfather sent home from the Pacific theatre. All the envelopes feature cartoons making fun of the Japanese and Germans that would be called extremely racist by today's standards. There are pictures of enemy dead butchered next to our smiling troops.

Fast forward 25 years to Vietnam. Dad's letters home weren't covered in cartoons making fun of the NVA. (Correct me if I'm wrong, but I believe we were trying the "hearts and minds" approach) The pictures didn't change too much though - enemy dead next to our smiling G.I.s - young men who ran the gauntlet for our country and survived.

Today we're still in a 10 year war, and apparently didn't learn too much from the conflict in Vietnam. The country as a whole has forgotten the war in the middle east, and for many the idea of supporting our troops was just a catchy slogan from the start. As a country, we're concerned with the rights and feelings of our enemies rather than destroying them. The wars are now planned by politicians rather than generals, and our troops suffer for it. I'm in the hooligan navy, and there's no shortage of dumb asses, officer and enlisted. My friends in other branches say the same. That doesn't mean, however, that our troops as a whole aren't capable. Given the ROEs and policies needed to win a war, I have no doubt that they would and could.

Many of my generation's failures are a result of a severe lack of parenting. most of that, in my opinion, is because of broken homes. Maybe the parents should have worked to fix their marriages rather than throwing in the towel. Maybe they shouldn't have let the television raise their children. maybe they should have had the testicular fortitude to talk about sex and drugs with their kids rather than leaving it up to the education system. Anyway, that's another topic all together. and maybe, just maybe, my generation should have been smart enough to know better before making so many careless decisions in life. (I'm not innocent, believe me. i've made my share of bad decisions too) The short answer is that no, I don't think we could fight and win a war like that again, but it's not any one group's fault. We all share the blame on this one.

There is much to consider in this post

 

[Sgt Nambu]

A global war on that scale.... I'd like to think we could, but I dunno. I think it would certainly separate the men from the boys though.

And the girls from the women too!

 

[Swedish K]

I believe that situation/location could play into this quite a bit. For instance, if a foreign army were to somehow invade the U.S. I'm fairly sure that people would pony up and fight harder than ever. They would do it because they actually would have a dog in the fight. When you have a war in another part of the world that no one cares about or believes in any longer then not so much. This has been going on for decades and is just amplified as population grows. I'm sure that the war II guys and that generation thought that the hippies and war protesters back in the Viet Nam era were prime examples of why the war was not going better and blamed the entire generation. The real problem wasn't so much that the military wasn't capable of a job so much as it was being run by politicians setting rules about how and where we should fight the war instead of loosing the war dogs with a simple instruction of win.

 

[trainsktg]

A lot more than now. My father was a WW2 vet BTW, and all my uncles. When things got wierd the family joke was "Are you scared?"

To encapulate I would say as a man who knew many of those men.. most young males today are not fit to tie their shoelaces in terms of sand

Blitz, were the soldiers 'then' better than the soldiers 'today'? You were born 15 years after WWII and were roughly 15 when the US left Vietnam so that leaves either Desert Storm or Iraq/Afghanistan. Are you a combat vet of either of those wars? If not, from where is your personal experience regarding the combat readiness of today's young people derived from? Doesn't the word of the US Marine recruiter above, who meets many of these young people every day, even sway your opinion one bit, and shouldn't his word be held in equal standing to those of your family members who fought during WWII?

Check out the demographics that won WW2 and see if it matches today.. add to that worthlessness of so many young "men" today..the answer is no

Back then, the Wops, Spics, Micks, Krauts, Catholics and Protestants etc were just as divided and at each other's throats as the Whites, Blacks and Hispanics are today. They united then against a common foe, why would it be so different today?

Keith

 

[trainsktg]

There is much to consider in this post

Yes there is, and here we see common ground. But now we are talking about the Political Class' will to fight a war, not the folks fighting it. For the most part the way the wars have been run for the last 40 years stinks.

Keith

 

[Jamie6.5]

I do everyday. I'm a recruiter for the Marine Corps. Media will have you believe that our younger generations don't have what it takes. There are plenty of young folks who I would, and probably will share battle space with in the future.

When bubblegum gets tough, Americans do what we always have. Win battles and leave politics to politicians.

Side note: there are plenty of people who have enlisted, not for self, but for country. A lot enlisted after 9/11 knowing the risks. And they performed great. It may not have been WWII, but the threat of death is still the same.

Thanks Marine.
And please, keep up the good work!

 

[huthuthike]

I am anti war-for-conquest and false foreign "allies" but I must say I've known both types of men and I can speak with authority as to their natures. Have you, my friend?

I've not seen combat but I have seen good men and bad men. I've seen bad men become good men and vice versa. My point is that no one thought Audie Murphy would be a good soldier and he became the most decorated soldier of WWII. He is actually a perfect example of my belief (maybe hope is a better word) that today's youth could also outperform many people's expectations.

 

[Blitzkrieg]

And the girls from the women too!

Women do not belong anywhere near a battlefield

 

[Blitzkrieg]

I've not seen combat but I have seen good men and bad men. I've seen bad men become good men and vice versa. My point is that no one thought Audie Murphy would be a good soldier and he became the most decorated soldier of WWII. He is actually a perfect example of my belief (maybe hope is a better word) that today's youth could also outperform many people's expectations.

He was the product of his era and his kind are nearly extinct today, especially among the young

 

[Blitzkrieg]

Yes there is, and here we see common ground. But now we are talking about the Political Class' will to fight a war, not the folks fighting it. For the most part the way the wars have been run for the last 40 years stinks.

Keith

I agree, my handle is how wars should be fought IF they are truly necessary. IMO very few are

 

[trainsktg]

He was the product of his era and his kind are nearly extinct today, especially among the young

Well, then we are going to have to agree to disagree. Their taste in music sucks, their spelling and punctuation is atrocious, but I do not believe that today's youth, when presented with true adversity, will be unable to cope.

I leave you now with these wise words:

"What is happening to our young
people? They disrespect their elders, they disobey their parents. They
ignore the law. They riot in the streets inflamed with wild notions.
Their morals are decaying. What is to become of them?" - Plato

All this has happened before, and all of it will happen again - Peter Pan

Keith

 

[Grunwald]

The truth is that WWII was not that much of a challenge to the US. Besides getting bombed at Perl Harbor, all the fighting was done on foreign soil. It was a war of convinience, when you compare what the European nations went through.
Today aI seriously doubt that the public would tolerate those levels of casualties. It is doubtful they would tolerate a real war even on foreign soil where there is no sharp distinction between military and civilian targets. Today people expect the wars to be sanitized. We have seen 1/2 the population knowing the enemy executed out people by beheading them with a big knife and yet found it unexceptable for our guys to low levels of torture on their guys..

However we are not nearly as gone as the Brits. Examine the changes in England from WWII to today and the French of WWII are looking heroic.