When I argued with Timbeaux in the comments boxes that modern warfare was completely different from anything that had come before, I forgot that he had already drawn my attention to this incident.
25May04 — 2
- 04.05.23 Ten-year quest through Development Hell pays off
- 04.04.23 Testing "podcasting"
- 04.03.23 Mistakes Have Been Made
- 04.02.23 Coming soon
- 11.02.19 Live comedy review: Geoff Norcott at the Southport Comedy Festival
- 08.20.19 Republic Interiors
- 12.27.18 The Wykehamist Fallacy
- 12.08.18 The Moral Degradation of The Labour Party
- 10.14.18 FILM REVIEW: Downsizing
- 09.09.18 Film Review: Fright Night
The major revolutionary changes on the battlefield are in Command and Control, and to a lesser degree mobility and night-vision capabilities. Commanders know where their forces are and what they are doing better than they ever have before, but the shooting and stabbing parts haven’t change much since WWII. New capabilities don’t always render the old ways obsolete, just less fashionable.
Although the Scots Guards performed admirably in a bayonet charge, the immediate question that should come to mind is “why the Hell were they forced to charge with bayonets?” (a question The Scotsman fails to ask. One wonders what journalistic employment standards are in effect when a report fails to address the most obvious question). Several other reports fail to mention the fact that the Scots were out of ammunition, thus forced to charge with bayonets.
“Why were they out of ammunition?” That question would be getting pounded by Dan Rather if these had been American troops. They would be “under-supplied” and logistics would be a “mis-managed nightmare” that was all Bush’s and/or Rumsfeld’s fault.
Sorry if I sound a bit perturbed, it’s just that Goebels and Andropov seem to be editing my news lately.
Love a Good Debate
Pootergeek and I, as well as a fellow named David Duff, have been debating Sun Tzu, the nature of war, and grand strategy in Iraq and the War on Terror. Check it out if you like….