User:Conservative/Military and related information

From Conservapedia
Jump to navigation Jump to search
U.S. soldier

YouTube military channels

Causes of war

Avoiding war

Diplomacy vs. war

Just War Theory

Book: Forceful Persuasion: Coercive Diplomacy As an Alternative to War

Concept:

Book:

Articles and real world examples:

Top 10 militaries by strength: USA ranked the strongest in the world

See also: The United States will be the leading power in the world for the foreseeable future

See: The strength of the United States military

Proxy wars

Wars often come quickly and suddenly

"First of all, it is extremely challenging to predict the when and how wars will breakout, especially as war plans are often decided within only a few months or weeks of the decision to begin the attack. The First World War erupted into war on July 28 1914, only a month after the June 28 Sarajevo assassination or Archduke Ferdinand, and was accompanied by frenetic diplomatic efforts at peace. All of the major powers: France, Imperial Germany, Russia and Austria-Hungary, had mass conscription numbering in the millions, and were spring-loaded for rapid mobilization of these soldiers into uniforms and delivery to the front by train. British member of parliament Winston Churchill, in a warning in his 1933 speech about German rearmament, was correct that Europe was less prone to a sudden breakout of war between major powers than in 1914, but also prescient that generally “Wars come very suddenly.” Hitler’s plan to invade Poland on September 1, 1939, which started the Second World War, was formulated just five months earlier on April 3. Putin’s decision to invade Ukraine in February 2022, according to U.S. estimates, was only made in October 2021. Has Xi Jinping decided yet on the date of China’s invasion of Taiwan?"[1]

Warfare: Strategies and tactics

Assymetrical warfare

 
Using the teachings of Sun Tzu to warfare, all warfare is asymmetric because one exploits an enemy’s strengths while attacking his weaknesses.[1]

Asymmetrical warfare involves "unconventional strategies and tactics adopted by a force when the military capabilities of belligerent powers are not simply unequal but are so significantly different that they cannot make the same sorts of attacks on each other."[2]

Encyclopædia Britannica indicates:

“ Guerrilla warfare, occurring between lightly armed partisans and a conventional army, is an example of asymmetrical warfare. Terrorist tactics, such as hijackings and suicide bombings, are also considered to be asymmetrical, both because they tend to involve a smaller, weaker group attacking a stronger one and also because attacks on civilians are by definition one-way warfare. War between a country that is both able and willing to use nuclear weapons and a country that is not would be another example of asymmetrical warfare.[3] ”

Using the teachings of Sun Tzu to warfare, all warfare is asymmetric because one exploits an enemy's strengths while attacking his weaknesses.[4]

"So in war, the way is to avoid what is strong and to strike at what is weak." - Sun Tzu

Asymmetrical warfare and cyberattacks

Asymmetrical warfare can involve cyberattacks designed to destabilize governments. Activities include cyber espionage capabilities that target not only government agencies and the military but also corporations such as financial institutions and defense contractors. Asymmetrical warfare as a division of the military will target a nations command and control systems, also known as cyber warfare.[5] In the corporate world, cyber intruders exploit systems to allow access to corporate intellectual property and secrets. Asymmetrical warfare is difficult to stop or track. Compromised systems may be undetected and lay dormant for years until war breaks out and only then are these systems designed to disable computer networks.

External links

Videos:

Sun Tzu's Art of War

 
Statue of Sun Tzu

Articles:

Book:

Videos: Sun Tzu documentaries and summaries

Sun Tzu's Art of War summaries:

History channel:

Douglas MacArthur

See also: Leadership and Strategic planning skills and Organizational skills and Confidence and Courage and Leapfrogging (military strategy) and Conflict resolution and Pride and Hubris

"Douglas MacArthur's strategic genius lay in his bold and decisive leadership, particularly his ability to inspire troops and execute ambitious offensives, like the Inchon landing in the Korean War. He also demonstrated a keen understanding of logistics and operational planning, especially in the Pacific Theater during World War II - particularly his use of "island-hopping" in the Pacific during World War II. He also demonstrated strategic vision in his post-war role as Supreme Commander for the Allied Powers in Japan, overseeing the demilitarization, democratization, and economic recovery of the country. However, his ambition and tendency to disregard civilian authority also led to conflict and ultimately, his dismissal." - What was the strategic genius of Douglas MacArthur?

Articles/videos:



 
Douglas MacArthur

War of attrition

 
"What is essential in war is victory, not prolonged operations." - Sun Tzu

Against wars of attrition

"General Norman Schwarzkopf's approach to war, particularly during Operation Desert Storm, exemplified maneuver warfare. This philosophy emphasizes identifying the enemy's weak points, exploiting those weaknesses, and achieving victory through strategic movement and deception, rather than head-on confrontation and attrition."[2] Ethical/non-ethical strategic deception: STRATEGIC MILITARY DECEPTION (For example, Eisenhower had inflatable tanks that looked like real tanks to fool German aerial intelligence efforts).

"The statement "no war is intentionally a war of attrition" is true in the sense that no conflict is initially planned as a war of attrition. Wars of attrition are not a specific type of war with a set beginning or end, but rather a characterization of a conflict that evolves due to circumstances and strategies employed.

Wars are not intentionally designed as attrition:

Military strategists and leaders typically aim for decisive victories or strategic advantages, not a slow, grinding war of exhaustion.

Attrition emerges as a consequence:

Wars of attrition often result from prolonged engagements, the inability of one side to achieve a decisive breakthrough, or the resource constraints faced by combatants.

Attrition is a descriptive term:

It's used to describe a conflict where destruction and losses are high, and the focus is on wearing down the enemy's ability to fight rather than achieving a quick or decisive victory."[3]

"Supreme excellence consists of breaking the enemy's resistance without fighting." - Sun Tzu

"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." - Sun Tzu

"What is essential in war is victory, not prolonged operations." - Sun Tzu

"There is no instance of a country having benefited from prolonged warfare." - Sun Tzu

View that incorporates wars of attrition

  • The Return to Attrition: Warfare in the Late Nation-State Era, 2007: "Americans desire their conflicts to be a championship boxing match, fought in plain view at high noon and settled by a knockout punch. Unfortunately, the reality of warfare in many ages has often been more like a thousand separate wrestling matches, fought in the dark and won by tripping the opponent. American defense officials must come to terms, first, with the nature of this era and the constraints that it will place on warfare."

Jungles of Vietnam and the difficult mountainous terrain of Afghanistan makes manoeuvre warfare difficult. France/USA got bogged down in Vietnam. Britain/Soviets/USA got bogged down in Afghanistan.

The civilian sector drives more innovation in a society than the military sector. Military power rests on economic power and economic resiliency

"The civilian sector generally drives more innovation overall. While the military sector can be a catalyst for technological advancements, particularly in areas like defense technology, the civilian sector's broader scope, market-driven incentives, and the large number of innovators create a more fertile ground for innovation in a wide variety of fields."[4]

"The civilian sector generally drives more innovation overall. While the military sector can be a catalyst for technological advancements, particularly in areas like defense technology, the civilian sector's broader scope, market-driven incentives, and the large number of innovators create a more fertile ground for innovation in a wide variety of fields."[5]

Innovation makes an economy more productive and prosperous and resilient. Through innovation a country can have more economic diversification which gives it more resiliency. See: High income countries are rarely authoritarian countries in our technological age driven by innovation.

"Military might is built on economic might. You need an economic foundation to build a really powerful military." - John Mearsheimer, 2022[6]

"John Mearsheimer's work, particularly his theory of Offensive Realism, strongly emphasizes the connection between economic strength and military power. In his view, a country's economic strength forms the foundation for its military capabilities."[7]

Modern wars on average lasts 10 years so economic resiliency for a country is an important factor in warfare. Wars are inflationary and inflation can lead to stagflation or a sugar high military Keynesian economy followed by a recession (growing corporate/company bankruptcies, overall civilian economy being hurt, housing crisis, etc.). See also: Guns and butter economic concept

Postwar: The transition from a war economy to a civilian economy can be difficult for a less strong/resilient economy. And winning wars is not enough. Countries need to win the peace. The USA lost the Vietnam proxy war, but it won the peace. The USA has more economic ties to Vietnam than China/Russia (Soviet Union helped the Vietmanese in Vietnam War).

See also: Guns and butter economic concept

Israel military

 
The Israeli flag

Israeli civilian tech sector

"Israel is a global leader in high-tech, with a strong research and development (R&D) sector, a large number of startups, and a skilled workforce. Israel's high-tech sector is a major contributor to the country's economy, generating more than half of its exports.

R&D: Israel is second in the world for R&D per capita."[8]

See also:

Middle-income trap and military spending

Military: Quantity vs. quantity

Types of weapons

"The phrase "Quantity has a quality of its own" is a well-known saying that highlights the idea that a large number of items, even if individually of lower quality, can collectively possess a significant quality or impact according to several sources. It suggests that sheer volume can change the nature of something, creating a new quality from the aggregation of individual elements."[9]

"The West is approaching weaponry the wrong way when thinking about major conflicts, a Ukrainian industry rep said. Countries need a lot of pretty good weapons instead of only a handful of excellent ones...

It's a warning that industry officials, experts, and some European defense ministers have echoed."

He said it wasn't about getting rid of the expensive weaponry completely, but about finding a balance. It's about "getting speed and enough quality done in the right conjunction."

That's something warfare experts have also told BI.

Michael O'Hanlon, a senior fellow and the director of research in the foreign-policy program at the Brookings Institution, said the West's approach needs to change. The American military, for instance, is far more used to wars where "the whole point is you're not going to be slogging it out for months and years on end.

But he also said that doesn't mean the West needs to completely abandon the development of advanced systems. "Those things have not become unimportant just because we realized that other things are also important," he said...

The West, on the other hand, has spent the last two decades and change fighting lower-level adversaries where its forces can win the day with superior capabilities."

Europe/West and a conventional land war

Indian defense website, 2024: "Europe and the US have now set in motion plans to revive their defense industries. While it may take them around a decade to increase production, swell their military hardware, and reorient themselves towards conventional war, after being out of touch with the habit since the 1990s, they will nevertheless meet the need for mass."[10]

The West/NATO has more manpower and a bigger collective economy than Russia plus Europe/Germany/Finland/Sweden/Poland are building up their militaries

The United States has a significant number of military/strategic allies and strategic partnerships such as the: North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO) (NATO is made up of 32 countries. In 2024, the combined population of the 32 member countries of NATO was about 973 million people[6] and the combined GDP of all 32 NATO members was $45.93319 trillion.[7]); Aukus (a trilateral security partnership for the Indo-Pacific region between Australia, the United Kingdom, and the United States); the Pacific Islands Forum (PIF), and the Organization of American States (OAS). See: Who Are the US Allies: A Comprehensive Guide to America’s Key International Partnerships and Advancing U.S. Alliances and Partnerships through Security Sector Governance Initiatives

On December 17, 2024, the Quincy Institute's website Responsible Statecraft stated:

“ Russian GDP is 24.5 times smaller than the combined GDP of NATO members and 11.5 times smaller than in the U.S. Its population is seven times smaller than the combined NATO population and almost two and a half times smaller than the American population. Its much expanded total military headcount is only 45% of the size of NATO standing armies. In an attritional war with NATO, which Russia has always sought to avoid, it would not have the demographic or economic reserves to win out.[8] ”

For more information, please see: The United States States has a significant number of allies and strategic partnerships

NATO

 
Flag of NATO
  • NATO, My Conservapedia resource
  • NATO - Google sites

As of 2024, the USA pays 16% of NATO's total budget.[11]

Donald Trump and NATO

"During a free-wheeling press conference, Trump affirmed his commitment to NATO, intimated that he could still supply Ukraine with aid, chastised Russian President Vladimir Putin and spoke admiringly of other leaders’ love for their countries...Trump heralded NATO’s adoption of a new spending goal for members to devote 5 percent of gross domestic product to defense over the next decade as “a monumental win for the United States, because we were carrying much more than our fair share, quite unfair actually.” But rather than grousing about the past, Trump reveled in his own catalytic role in helping to rebalance the alliance."[12]

  • Trump embraces NATO security alliance after years of attacks, June 2025 "The message came as NATO’s 32 nations agreed to more than double their defense spending targets, long a sore spot with Trump but now a selling point for his involvement in transatlantic security. It was an about-face from the president’s first term..."

JD Vance's view of NATO

 
JD Vance

NATO and Ukraine

Expansion of NATO and NATO countries building up militarily post Putin's invasion of Ukraine in 2022

The promise to not expand NATO to the East was made to the Soviet Union - not Russia. For more details about NATO's expansion, please see: Expansion of NATO

"NATO member states are actively increasing their military capabilities, driven by a heightened sense of security concerns and the need to deter potential adversaries. This includes bolstering defense spending, deploying more troops to the eastern flank, and strengthening military planning and exercises. New member states like Finland and Sweden are also being integrated into NATO's plans and structures."[13]

Articles:

Video: NATO demands 400% arms buildup as Russia outpaces West

Germany's military buildup

Finland joining NATO

 
Flag of Finland

Putin's invasion of Ukraine caused formerly neutral Finland to join NATO.

Sweden joining NATO

Formally neutral Sweden joins NATO after Putin's invasion of Ukraine.

Poland

Russian military

"Russia is never as strong as she looks; Russia is never as weak as she looks." - Otto Von Bismarck

Russian military weaknesses

Russian hawks' despair:

Slowness of Russian advances in Ukraine at a very high cost. Ukraine is a flat open land

See also: Russian war advances slower than WWI despite Ukraine being a flat open land. Russia's economy is a big mess

Since January 2024, Russian forces have achieved only minimal territorial gains at an extremely slow rate of advance (slower than WWI’s Battle of the Somme), while suffering staggering casualties and disproportionally high equipment cost.[14]

Russian air defense weaknesses:

Russia's tank supply is dwindling:

"Yes, evidence suggests that Russia is experiencing a significant shortage of tanks and other armored vehicles. Analysis indicates that Russia's ability to field tanks has declined, with the trend accelerating, and the Institute for the Study of War suggesting Russia may be running out of Soviet-era equipment by the end of 2025 or in 2026. This is due to high loss rates in the conflict with Ukraine and challenges in maintaining and replenishing its inventory."[15] See also: Russia is running out of tanks

Russia Starts Sending GRANDPAS to the Front Lines

See also: Russia is dying out. The war in Ukraine is making Russia's demographic crisis even worse

Question: Are pregnant, Russian women, combat soldiers next?

Global power website

Better demographics and a country being a stronger power

USA and demographics and it being favorable to other major powers

Military hardware sales

Russia:

"India has shifted large volumes of arms purchases from Russia to the United States."[16]

Military, wars, mass murder and expense

 
WWII photo montage

"The level of war in the world seems to have risen to 1989 (post-WWII) peak levels and holding, ending the pacific 1989-2006 era. Does this contradict the Decline of Violence (Pinker) / End of History (Fukuyama) theses, or is it just a blip?". - Professor Eric Kaufmann, Twitter/X.[17], See: War and Peace.

War, debt and the collapse of empires

Percent of wars that ended in a negotiated solution

"Historically, wars end with either a complete military victory, a ceasefire, or a negotiated peace settlement. According to The Hague Centre for Strategic Studies, only 16 percent of wars between 1946 and 2005 have ended in a negotiated solution. Among these peace settlements, 37 percent led to renewed conflict, often within just two years. Negotiations tend to be most successful when parties successfully establish a baseline of trust, address the root causes of the conflict, or provide a framework for future nonviolent resolution. Further, measures such as publicizing aspects of the negotiation process and involving trusted mediators can increase transparency and help insulate the peace process from potential external disruptions, increasing the likelihood of reaching an agreement."[18]

"Nearly 40 percent of peace agreements since 1975 have collapsed within five years of their inception. Whether war breaks out again or spoilers set back the process, many agreements simply don’t last long after they’ve been signed."[19]

How long do wars last?

Wars start out as wars of maneuver. If a war a war of maneuver doesn't achieve victory in 6 months, then it most cases it turns into a war of attrition (Wars of attrition are more common than insurgencies after a war).[20]

Wars are ended by removing an enemies will to fight and/or ability to fight (Productive capacity)[21]

  • "Supreme excellence consists of breaking the enemy's resistance without fighting." - Sun Tzu
  • "What is essential in war is victory, not prolonged operations." - Sun Tzu
  • "There is no instance of a country having benefited from prolonged warfare." - Sun Tzu

How long do post WWII wars last? Some statistics:

Georgetown University's Center for Strategic and International Studies (CSIS) is a bipartisan, nonprofit policy research organization & think tank analyzing global issues.

The Center for Strategic and International Studies article How Does It End? What Past Wars Tell Us about How to Save Ukraine

“ Analyzing data compiled by the Uppsala Conflict Data Program (UCDP) on conflict termination since 1946, 26 percent of interstate wars like Ukraine end in less than 30 days and another 25 percent end in less than a year. Wars that end within a month last on average eight days, and 44 percent end in a ceasefire or peace agreement. Of wars that last over a month but less than a year, only 24 percent end in a ceasefire. When interstate wars last longer than a year, they extend to over a decade on average, resulting in sporadic clashes.[9] ”
 
Georgetown University's Center for Strategic and International Studies indicates that most wars lasting over a year extend to over a decade on average, resulting in sporadic clashes.[10]

Just war vs. realist view of war

Winning the peace vs. winning a war

Military

Wars and warlike natures

Studies:

Democratic peace theory and related matters

Mass murder

Right-wing death squads vs. Left-wing murderous regimes

Military concepts

 
Carl von Clausewitz

Military competence and incompetence

  • Task and purpose (Chris Cappy is a former US Army infantryman and Iraq Veteran. I cover geopolitics, history, weapon systems and all things military related — I do this from a veteran's perspective.).

Military competence

  • Deliberate Discomfort: How U.S. Special Operations Forces Overcome Fear and Dare to Win by Getting Comfortable Being Uncomfortable by Jason B.A. Van Camp and Andy Symonds. Ballast Books (February 18, 2020)

Military incompetence

  • On the Psychology of Military Incompetence by Norman F Dixon. Basic Books; Illustrated edition (May 31, 2016)
  • Military Incompetence: Why the American Military Doesn't Win (American Century) by Richard A. Gabriel. Hill & Wang Pub; First Edition (January 1, 1985)

Are we headed towards WWIII? It's not likely - at least not yet

See also: Are we headed towards WWIII? It's not likely - at least not yet (Archive version)

 
There is a new war. Oh, no!

I will never get out of my bunny hole! It must be WWIII!

Please see (including the video): Some Clear Thinking on why World War III is NOT happening anytime soon


 
There is a new war. Oh, no! It's WWIII!

Please see (including the video): Some Clear Thinking on why World War III is NOT happening anytime soon


 
According to the National Peanut Board, American women and children prefer creamy peanut butter, while most American men prefer chunky peanut butter.[11]

If you are scared that WWIII has started despite a lack of evidence that it has, consider the possibility that you lack machismo.

Victories in war are not necessarily won by winning battles. Wars can be won by eliminating the enemies will to fight which is a critical factor in winning wars

 
"Supreme excellence consists of breaking the enemy's resistance without fighting."- Sun Tzu

In the Vietnam War, the Vietnamese consistently lost the bigger battles and the U.S. General Westmoreland was obsessed about body counts that showed the USA was "winning". However, although the Tet Offensive was not ultimately not a successful operation militarily, it did win on the propaganda front because it showed the American public that the Vietcong were not on their last legs. Specifically, the Tiet Offensive showed that the Vietmanese still had power to oppose the USA via a large operation and as a result of this the American public soured on the war. One does not win wars solely by winning battles. Breaking the will of the enemy is a key component as far as how wars are won (And wars are generally governed by politics[25]). Near the end of the Vietnam War at the peace negotiations, the American officer Harry Summers said to a Vietcong colonel that the USA won on the battlefield and the Vietcong did not. The Vietcong colonel replied back, that's true, but it is also irrelevant.[26] It was the political context that was more important in the Vietnam War than the military context. But ultimately the the USA won the peace in Vietnam as evidenced by all the Coca Cola now being sold in Vietnam and the current cordial relations between the USA and Vietnam.

One of the things the Russians may face in Ukraine if they win a pyrrhic victory is a Ukrainian insurgency that wears down the Russians. Most insurgencies are not successful and last about 10 years.[27][28] However, The Troubles insurgency in Northern Ireland lasted about 30 years and perhaps the same could happen in Ukraine due to the bitterness of the conflict and due to the intensity of Ukrainian nationalism. This may come into play because of two factors: First, Russia defector reveals 'majority' of people inside Kremlin unhappy with war in Ukraine, ABC News video, July 2023. This shows that some of the will to fight in the Kremlin may have been diminished (But Putin likely calls the shots so this issue is not a definitive point). Secondly, as far as the Kursk invasion, the inability of the Russian state to protect its borders shows this: Russia has failed as a state, Modern Diplomacy, 2023 and Almost half of global strategists think Russia could become a failed state within the next 10 years, Fortune magazine, January 23, 2023 and Will Russia become a failed state within 10 years? Is Russia currently a failed state? Will Russia eventually become a failed state?

"Supreme excellence consists of breaking the enemy's resistance without fighting." - Sun Tzu

Heritage Foundation view wanting the USA to be the policeman of the world rather than a more isolationist view. Interventionalist view

Preface:

Heritage resources:

Video:

International relations and politics

References

  1. ↑ DEFINING ASYMMETRIC WARFARE, Association of the United States Army
  2. ↑ Asymmetrical warfare, Britannica
  3. ↑ Asymmetrical warfare, Britannica
  4. ↑ DEFINING ASYMMETRIC WARFARE, Association of the United States Army
  5. ↑ Google vs. China: The Tip of the Cyberwar, Fox News, January 22, 2010
  6. ↑ NATO alliances, Worddata.info website
  7. ↑ Funding NATO, NATO website
  8. ↑ NATO countries spending 3%? That's empire., Responsible Statecraft website, December 17, 2024
  9. ↑ How Does It End? What Past Wars Tell Us about How to Save Ukraine, 2022, Center for Strategic and International Studies website
  10. ↑ How Does It End? What Past Wars Tell Us about How to Save Ukraine, 2022, Center for Strategic and International Studies website
  11. ↑ http://www.nationalpeanutboard.org/classroom-funfacts.php
Retrieved from "https://www.conservapedia.com/index.php?title=User:Conservative/Military_and_related_information&oldid=2189915"