Site Notices

[ARCHIVED THREAD] - Rhodesian Army (Page 6 of 10)

Posted: 10/7/2011 8:23:55 AM EDT

[#1]

Quoted:

Quoted:

The age of minority governments was ending, and frankly a minority government is antithetical to the ideals upon which this country was founded.

All that being said, the "Majority/African rule now!" sentiment that predominated in the US and UK was horribly misguided. A slower, more gradual transition (I'm talking a couple decades minimum) with power sharing would have allowed the black Africans to eventually govern competently, and probably would have prevented the racial animosity that currently exists.

The situation in Rhodesia and South Africa (white minority government) could not have continued indefinitely. What ended up happening with the immediate change to majority rule was easily foreseeable, which makes it all the more tragic.

The last Prime Minister of Rhodesia was black.

The communist party was illegal in Rhodesia. Carter didn't throw Rhodesia under the bus because of race. He threw it under the bus because it wasn't communist.

No, the last Prime Minister of Rhodesia was white.

The Prime Minister of the short-lived (and unrecognized) successor state of Rhodesia, known as Zimbabwe-Rhodesia, was black.

Zimbabwe-Rhodesia was a separate and distinct entity from Rhodesia that existed for just over 6 months, from June through December 1979. It was a result of an attempted settlement between Smith's government of Rhodesia and African groups that were not involved in the Bush War.

Posted: 10/7/2011 8:35:34 AM EDT

[#2]

Quoted:

Quoted:

The age of minority governments was ending, and frankly a minority government is antithetical to the ideals upon which this country was founded.

All that being said, the "Majority/African rule now!" sentiment that predominated in the US and UK was horribly misguided. A slower, more gradual transition (I'm talking a couple decades minimum) with power sharing would have allowed the black Africans to eventually govern competently, and probably would have prevented the racial animosity that currently exists.

The situation in Rhodesia and South Africa (white minority government) could not have continued indefinitely. What ended up happening with the immediate change to majority rule was easily foreseeable, which makes it all the more tragic.

The last Prime Minister of Rhodesia was black.

The communist party was illegal in Rhodesia. Carter didn't throw Rhodesia under the bus because of race. He threw it under the bus because it wasn't communist.

No, the last Prime Minister of Rhodesia was white.

The Prime Minister of the short-lived (and unrecognized) successor state of Rhodesia, known as Zimbabwe-Rhodesia, was black.

Zimbabwe-Rhodesia was a separate and distinct entity from Rhodesia that existed for just over 6 months, from June through December 1979. It was a result of an attempted settlement between Smith's government of Rhodesia and African groups that were not involved in the Bush War.

The Z-R government under Murzowewa was actually more aggressive in anti-terrorist operations than Smith's government.

Posted: 10/7/2011 8:44:57 AM EDT

[#3]

Quoted:

Quoted:
The age of minority governments was ending, and frankly a minority government is antithetical to the ideals upon which this country was founded.

All that being said, the "Majority/African rule now!" sentiment that predominated in the US and UK was horribly misguided. A slower, more gradual transition (I'm talking a couple decades minimum) with power sharing would have allowed the black Africans to eventually govern competently, and probably would have prevented the racial animosity that currently exists.

The situation in Rhodesia and South Africa (white minority government) could not have continued indefinitely. What ended up happening with the immediate change to majority rule was easily foreseeable, which makes it all the more tragic.

The last Prime Minister of Rhodesia was black.
The communist party was illegal in Rhodesia. Carter didn't throw Rhodesia under the bus because of race. He threw it under the bus because it wasn't communist.

No, the last Prime Minister of Rhodesia was white.

The Prime Minister of the short-lived (and unrecognized) successor state of Rhodesia, known as Zimbabwe-Rhodesia, was black.

Zimbabwe-Rhodesia was a separate and distinct entity from Rhodesia that existed for just over 6 months, from June through December 1979. It was a result of an attempted settlement between Smith's government of Rhodesia and African groups that were not involved in the Bush War.

The Z-R government under Murzowewa was actually more aggressive in anti-terrorist operations than Smith's government.

Which actually makes sense, when view the traditional objectives of Communists in Africa wasn't majority rule, but the ending of Western leaning governments in Rhodesia, South Africa and most interestingly, Congo.

The brilliance of African Communists in Information Operations aimed at Western populations is nothing short of amazing, and incredibly successful.

ETA: For insight into this, I'd recommend "Africa's World War: Congo, the Rwandan Genocide, and the Making of a Continental Catastrophe" by Gerard Prunier (ISBN: 978-0195374209)

Posted: 10/7/2011 8:50:27 AM EDT

[#4]

This thread makes me want a FAL. Plus I've got all this .308 laying around.

Posted: 10/7/2011 8:55:32 AM EDT

[#5]

Quoted:

Quoted:
Why is it again that Atf loves the Rhodesian military so much?

Because the Rhodesian Forces were probably with out par the best counter insurgency force going. They continued to fight while under embargo and until the time that they were completely cut off.

Maybe we hate communists, which is who they were fighting.

Maybe we don't fool ourselves into thinking that Rhodesia was SA.

Maybe we have studied it enough to realize what it wasn't about and what it was about.

Maybe some of us know Ex-Pat Rhodies who served in the RLI or another unit.

Maybe we don't suffer from:

White Guilt

Colonial Guilt

African Guilt

Amen.

Posted: 10/7/2011 9:00:30 AM EDT

[#6]

Quoted:
How many white farmers are left at this point? Were they all killed?

A few but as I understand it most have been run off. If you have Netflix, check out Mugabe and the White African.

Posted: 10/7/2011 10:03:24 AM EDT

[#7]

Quoted:

How many white farmers are left at this point? Were they all killed?

Charles Taffs, head of the Commercial Farmers Union representing Zimbabwe's 300 remaining white farmers said on Monday that the brutal beating to death of a prominent farmer 55 miles (90 kilometres) northwest of Harare on Friday showed that "criminals can act with impunity" against whites still on their land.

Taffs said the ferocity of Friday's killing made it more than a "simple robbery" as police claimed.

As of a month ago: http://www.timeslive.co.za/africa/2011/09/05/zimbabwe-s-white-farmers-still-target-of-violence

Posted: 10/7/2011 11:54:25 AM EDT

[#8]

Quoted:

Quoted:

How many white farmers are left at this point? Were they all killed?

A few but as I understand it most have been run off. If you have Netflix, check out Mugabe and the White African.

An absolutely horrifying story.

Posted: 10/7/2011 4:51:35 PM EDT

[#9]

Posted: 10/7/2011 5:16:20 PM EDT

[#10]

Quoted:

Quoted:
The age of minority governments was ending, and frankly a minority government is antithetical to the ideals upon which this country was founded.

All that being said, the "Majority/African rule now!" sentiment that predominated in the US and UK was horribly misguided. A slower, more gradual transition (I'm talking a couple decades minimum) with power sharing would have allowed the black Africans to eventually govern competently, and probably would have prevented the racial animosity that currently exists.

The situation in Rhodesia and South Africa (white minority government) could not have continued indefinitely. What ended up happening with the immediate change to majority rule was easily foreseeable, which makes it all the more tragic.

The last Prime Minister of Rhodesia was black.
The communist party was illegal in Rhodesia. Carter didn't throw Rhodesia under the bus because of race. He threw it under the bus because it wasn't communist.

No, the last Prime Minister of Rhodesia was white.

The Prime Minister of the short-lived (and unrecognized) successor state of Rhodesia, known as Zimbabwe-Rhodesia, was black.

Zimbabwe-Rhodesia was a separate and distinct entity from Rhodesia that existed for just over 6 months, from June through December 1979. It was a result of an attempted settlement between Smith's government of Rhodesia and African groups that were not involved in the Bush War.

unrecognized by whom and why?

Posted: 10/7/2011 6:52:42 PM EDT

[#11]

Quoted:

Quoted:
How many white farmers are left at this point? Were they all killed?

A few but as I understand it most have been run off. If you have Netflix, check out Mugabe and the White African.

An absolutely horrifying story.

Mike Campbell was truly courageous man, I don't think I'd have the stones to stay on my farm if I were in his situation. After the movie wrapped he was driven off his farm and later died from the injuries he sustained in the attack, in case you haven't heard.

Mike Campbell Dead at 78

Posted: 10/7/2011 7:23:17 PM EDT

[#12]

Quoted:
My dad fought in the RLI, Support Commando. He saw a VA therapist for PTSD a few years back. When the therapist suggested his issues were from fighting in Rhodesia instead of the USAF, he said "Hell no, I loved killing those motherfuckers!"

I love my dad

Posted: 10/7/2011 7:28:54 PM EDT

[#13]

Quoted:
http://www.paul-a-williams.com/assets/images/db_images/db_beamanamongmen1.jpg

Awesome recruiting poster.

I wish I could find that as a poster

Posted: 10/7/2011 7:43:12 PM EDT

[#14]

Quoted:

Quoted:
Good thread. I wish we could have helped them out back during their war years.

Rog.

Hopefully someone helps us if it goes down the same way...

WHEN it goes down here in the US (and rest assurred it will) we will be on our own.

Posted: 10/7/2011 7:49:02 PM EDT

[#15]

Quoted:
This thread makes me want a FAL. Plus I've got all this .308 laying around.

I'll take some off your hands.

Posted: 10/8/2011 5:32:43 AM EDT

[#16]

Quoted:

Quoted:

The age of minority governments was ending, and frankly a minority government is antithetical to the ideals upon which this country was founded.

All that being said, the "Majority/African rule now!" sentiment that predominated in the US and UK was horribly misguided. A slower, more gradual transition (I'm talking a couple decades minimum) with power sharing would have allowed the black Africans to eventually govern competently, and probably would have prevented the racial animosity that currently exists.

The situation in Rhodesia and South Africa (white minority government) could not have continued indefinitely. What ended up happening with the immediate change to majority rule was easily foreseeable, which makes it all the more tragic.

The last Prime Minister of Rhodesia was black.

The communist party was illegal in Rhodesia. Carter didn't throw Rhodesia under the bus because of race. He threw it under the bus because it wasn't communist.

No, the last Prime Minister of Rhodesia was white.

The Prime Minister of the short-lived (and unrecognized) successor state of Rhodesia, known as Zimbabwe-Rhodesia, was black.

Zimbabwe-Rhodesia was a separate and distinct entity from Rhodesia that existed for just over 6 months, from June through December 1979. It was a result of an attempted settlement between Smith's government of Rhodesia and African groups that were not involved in the Bush War.

unrecognized by whom and why?

Because the Internal Settlement didn't include ZAPU (Joshua Nkomo's Soviet-supported insurgents) and ZANU (Robert Mugabe's Chinese-supported insurgents).

It was also because, in the eyes of foreign governments, it left too many whites in control of the Security Forces, Police, and Interior Ministry. However by the late 1970s the Rhodesian military had begun commissioning black African officers, and even after Mugabe came to power the old (white) commander of the RhAF stayed on as head of the Zimbabwean AF for several years.

Posted: 10/8/2011 5:58:01 AM EDT

[#17]

Quoted:

Quoted:

The age of minority governments was ending, and frankly a minority government is antithetical to the ideals upon which this country was founded.

All that being said, the "Majority/African rule now!" sentiment that predominated in the US and UK was horribly misguided. A slower, more gradual transition (I'm talking a couple decades minimum) with power sharing would have allowed the black Africans to eventually govern competently, and probably would have prevented the racial animosity that currently exists.

The situation in Rhodesia and South Africa (white minority government) could not have continued indefinitely. What ended up happening with the immediate change to majority rule was easily foreseeable, which makes it all the more tragic.

The last Prime Minister of Rhodesia was black.

The communist party was illegal in Rhodesia. Carter didn't throw Rhodesia under the bus because of race. He threw it under the bus because it wasn't communist.

No, the last Prime Minister of Rhodesia was white.

The Prime Minister of the short-lived (and unrecognized) successor state of Rhodesia, known as Zimbabwe-Rhodesia, was black.

Zimbabwe-Rhodesia was a separate and distinct entity from Rhodesia that existed for just over 6 months, from June through December 1979. It was a result of an attempted settlement between Smith's government of Rhodesia and African groups that were not involved in the Bush War.

unrecognized by whom and why?

By the entire world, primarily because the Internal Settlement hadn't included any of the major players in the Bush War (other than the white government). A "settlement" to an armed conflict that excludes major belligerents isn't a settlement at all.

Posted: 10/8/2011 5:59:24 AM EDT

[#18]

Quoted:

Quoted:

http://www.paul-a-williams.com/assets/images/db_images/db_beamanamongmen1.jpg

Awesome recruiting poster.

I wish I could find that as a poster

I've seen it as a poster in another arfcommer's house, I'll ask him where he got it.

ETA: Did you try google?

http://www.memoriesofrhodesia.com/pages/other-sales/art-army.html

Posted: 10/8/2011 7:08:15 AM EDT

[#19]

Quoted:
http://www.paul-a-williams.com/assets/images/db_images/db_beamanamongmen1.jpg

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2wybow3G7E8&feature=related

Vids are awesome

Posted: 10/8/2011 7:31:17 AM EDT

[#20]

Quoted:

Quoted:
The age of minority governments was ending, and frankly a minority government is antithetical to the ideals upon which this country was founded.

All that being said, the "Majority/African rule now!" sentiment that predominated in the US and UK was horribly misguided. A slower, more gradual transition (I'm talking a couple decades minimum) with power sharing would have allowed the black Africans to eventually govern competently, and probably would have prevented the racial animosity that currently exists.

The situation in Rhodesia and South Africa (white minority government) could not have continued indefinitely. What ended up happening with the immediate change to majority rule was easily foreseeable, which makes it all the more tragic.

The last Prime Minister of Rhodesia was black.
The communist party was illegal in Rhodesia. Carter didn't throw Rhodesia under the bus because of race. He threw it under the bus because it wasn't communist.

No, the last Prime Minister of Rhodesia was white.

The Prime Minister of the short-lived (and unrecognized) successor state of Rhodesia, known as Zimbabwe-Rhodesia, was black.

Zimbabwe-Rhodesia was a separate and distinct entity from Rhodesia that existed for just over 6 months, from June through December 1979. It was a result of an attempted settlement between Smith's government of Rhodesia and African groups that were not involved in the Bush War.

unrecognized by whom and why?

By the entire world, primarily because the Internal Settlement hadn't included any of the major players in the Bush War (other than the white government). A "settlement" to an armed conflict that excludes major belligerents isn't a settlement at all.

But I thought the conflict was between blacks wanting freedom and racists whites.

Surely you aren't telling me that this was a communism versus western government war?
And most surely you aren't telling me that President Carter demanded that the communists be given control of the government?

Are you saying that western europe abandoned Rhodesia to the communists? I thought it was because it was evil white racists oppressing blacks.

Posted: 10/8/2011 7:40:14 AM EDT

[#21]

Quoted:

Quoted:

The US military STILL hasn't digested the Rhodesian military's lessons for dealing with insurgents. They are frankly light-years ahead of us.

You should reread the part where their war ends in defeat.

And how many insurgencies have we successfully fought? Ten years... are the Taliban defeated? How did that Vietnam thing go?

Truth is the Rhodiesian Army is an outstanding example of a force dedicated to COIN warfare. They did way better than we have ever done with far less resources... only losing because they were sold out by the tide of history, just like we were in Vietnam and will be in Iraq and Afghanistan. Anyone who doesn't study the lessons learned here is an idiot.

Posted: 10/8/2011 7:41:44 AM EDT

[#22]

Quoted:

Quoted:

The US military STILL hasn't digested the Rhodesian military's lessons for dealing with insurgents. They are frankly light-years ahead of us.

You should reread the part where their war ends in defeat.

And how many insurgencies have we successfully fought? Ten years... are the Taliban defeated? How did that Vietnam thing go?

Truth is the Rhodiesian Army is an outstanding example of a force dedicated to COIN warfare. They did way better than we have ever done with far less resources... only losing because they were sold out by the tide of history, just like we were in Vietnam and will be in Iraq and Afghanistan. Anyone who doesn't study the lessons learned here is an idiot.

Posted: 10/8/2011 7:48:32 AM EDT

[#23]

http://www.psywar.org/rhodesia.php

Natasha Glenny, six and a half months old,

who was bayoneted to death by 20 terrorists in September, 1977.

Chikombe Marvidra whose face was mutilated by terrorists.

"The people who did this are not human beings" he said

The terrorists who carved up his face forced his wife to cook and eat the flesh.

More at the link.

Posted: 10/8/2011 8:02:04 AM EDT

[#24]

Quoted:

I am far from an expert on small unit tactics but just because they were wrong in the macro (apartheid) doesn't mean we can't learn anything from them in the micro (military tactics).

I don't know that they were even wrong in the macro, sure the Rhodesian blacks who got fucked out of their good farming land when the country was founded got screwed, but in the 20th century allowing the country to fall into chaos and be run by corrupt tin pot strongmen didn't really work out either. But it was all rearranging the chairs on the deck of the Titantic anyway with the political situation at the time.

I know they are praised as great anti guerrilla fighters, I don't know how much of that is romanticism (and there's plenty of that) and how much is legit.

I don't think the indigenous peoples of Rhodesia were farming very much when the whites showed up. I think the black population increased dramatically after the whites showed up. I think many migrated in after the whites took it. (Or the population exploded when the whites brought modern farming.)

The idea that the blacks had a "right" to the land whites over the whites is arguable. You're a lawyer, you would have to admit that the whites in Rhodesia had a better claim to the land that did the whites in North America during the westward expansion. And, with hindsight, the idea that we should have turned our back on the whites is absurd. We could have given them assistance to fight the communist insurrection and moved them towards a more stable form of government.

Posted: 10/8/2011 8:02:12 AM EDT

[#25]

Rhodesian National Park Game Rangers just as involved against CT's as RhSF:

Posted: 10/8/2011 8:14:06 AM EDT

[#26]

Quoted:

I am far from an expert on small unit tactics but just because they were wrong in the macro (apartheid) doesn't mean we can't learn anything from them in the micro (military tactics).

I don't know that they were even wrong in the macro, sure the Rhodesian blacks who got fucked out of their good farming land when the country was founded got screwed, but in the 20th century allowing the country to fall into chaos and be run by corrupt tin pot strongmen didn't really work out either. But it was all rearranging the chairs on the deck of the Titantic anyway with the political situation at the time.

I know they are praised as great anti guerrilla fighters, I don't know how much of that is romanticism (and there's plenty of that) and how much is legit.

I don't think the indigenous peoples of Rhodesia were farming very much when the whites showed up. I think the black population increased dramatically after the whites showed up. I think many migrated in after the whites took it. (Or the population exploded when the whites brought modern farming.)

The idea that the blacks had a "right" to the land whites over the whites is arguable. You're a lawyer, you would have to admit that the whites in Rhodesia had a better claim to the land that did the whites in North America during the westward expansion. And, with hindsight, the idea that we should have turned our back on the whites is absurd. We could have given them assistance to fight the communist insurrection and moved them towards a more stable form of government.

white? black? who cares?

communist versus western in the middle of the cold war.

Posted: 10/8/2011 8:15:04 AM EDT

[#27]

Quoted:

Quoted:

The US military STILL hasn't digested the Rhodesian military's lessons for dealing with insurgents. They are frankly light-years ahead of us.

You should reread the part where their war ends in defeat.

And how many insurgencies have we successfully fought? Ten years... are the Taliban defeated? How did that Vietnam thing go?

Truth is the Rhodiesian Army is an outstanding example of a force dedicated to COIN warfare. They did way better than we have ever done with far less resources... only losing because they were sold out by the tide of history, just like we were in Vietnam and will be in Iraq and Afghanistan. Anyone who doesn't study the lessons learned here is an idiot.

You've completely missed the lesson if you think any of those wars will be won, or lost, on the small unit level. The Rhodesian's lost their war on the field of international politics, just like Iraq and Afghanistan will be lost.

Posted: 10/8/2011 8:17:28 AM EDT

[#28]

Quoted:

Quoted:

The US military STILL hasn't digested the Rhodesian military's lessons for dealing with insurgents. They are frankly light-years ahead of us.

You should reread the part where their war ends in defeat.

And how many insurgencies have we successfully fought? Ten years... are the Taliban defeated? How did that Vietnam thing go?

Truth is the Rhodiesian Army is an outstanding example of a force dedicated to COIN warfare. They did way better than we have ever done with far less resources... only losing because they were sold out by the tide of history, just like we were in Vietnam and will be in Iraq and Afghanistan. Anyone who doesn't study the lessons learned here is an idiot.

You've completely missed the lesson if you think any of those wars will be won, or lost, on the small unit level. The Rhodesian's lost their war on the field of international politics, just like Iraq and Afghanistan will be lost.

their tactics were well within the considerations of modern counter-insurgency. Are you saying their tactics underminded their international legitimacy?
If so, which and how?

Posted: 10/8/2011 8:27:13 AM EDT

[#29]

Quoted:

Quoted:

The US military STILL hasn't digested the Rhodesian military's lessons for dealing with insurgents. They are frankly light-years ahead of us.

You should reread the part where their war ends in defeat.

And how many insurgencies have we successfully fought? Ten years... are the Taliban defeated? How did that Vietnam thing go?

Truth is the Rhodiesian Army is an outstanding example of a force dedicated to COIN warfare. They did way better than we have ever done with far less resources... only losing because they were sold out by the tide of history, just like we were in Vietnam and will be in Iraq and Afghanistan. Anyone who doesn't study the lessons learned here is an idiot.

You've completely missed the lesson if you think any of those wars will be won, or lost, on the small unit level. The Rhodesian's lost their war on the field of international politics, just like Iraq and Afghanistan will be lost.

their tactics were well within the considerations of modern counter-insurgency. Are you saying their tactics underminded their international legitimacy?
If so, which and how?

I don't think that anything they did tactically was going to save the day.

Posted: 10/8/2011 8:33:00 AM EDT

[#30]

Quoted:

Quoted:

The US military STILL hasn't digested the Rhodesian military's lessons for dealing with insurgents. They are frankly light-years ahead of us.

You should reread the part where their war ends in defeat.

And how many insurgencies have we successfully fought? Ten years... are the Taliban defeated? How did that Vietnam thing go?

Truth is the Rhodiesian Army is an outstanding example of a force dedicated to COIN warfare. They did way better than we have ever done with far less resources... only losing because they were sold out by the tide of history, just like we were in Vietnam and will be in Iraq and Afghanistan. Anyone who doesn't study the lessons learned here is an idiot.

You've completely missed the lesson if you think any of those wars will be won, or lost, on the small unit level. The Rhodesian's lost their war on the field of international politics, just like Iraq and Afghanistan will be lost.

their tactics were well within the considerations of modern counter-insurgency. Are you saying their tactics underminded their international legitimacy?
If so, which and how?

I don't think that anything they did tactically was going to save the day.

Tactics don't win wars. and they never have.

Posted: 10/8/2011 8:33:58 AM EDT

[#31]

Quoted:
good god why is the world letting Mugabe get away with what he did/

Jimmy Carter. My neighbor down the way was a Rhodesian SAS, it's funny when I was younger I was convinced he was from New Zealand. I found out from his son one time when I was over at his house, I finely got him to tell about it, the things they did. Hell this guy could still out run us, out fight us, and not break a sweat! The guy is absolutely amazing to listen to, he was there at the end, and that story is absolutely insane, what they went through to flee the country.

Posted: 10/8/2011 8:34:53 AM EDT

[#32]

Whether or not the tactics used by the RhSF was going to effect the political forces in play outside of Rhodesia does not negate the fact that they were at the time the best COIN dedicated force in the world.

Posted: 10/8/2011 8:35:13 AM EDT

[#33]

Quoted:
I don't think that anything they did tactically was going to save the day.

But you can't disparage the tactics they used by noting they lost the war.

Aero Scout/Fire Force would be a hell of a lot better than driving around and getting our balls blown off by IEDs.

Posted: 10/8/2011 8:37:38 AM EDT

[#34]

Quoted:

Quoted:

The US military STILL hasn't digested the Rhodesian military's lessons for dealing with insurgents. They are frankly light-years ahead of us.

You should reread the part where their war ends in defeat.

And how many insurgencies have we successfully fought? Ten years... are the Taliban defeated? How did that Vietnam thing go?

Truth is the Rhodiesian Army is an outstanding example of a force dedicated to COIN warfare. They did way better than we have ever done with far less resources... only losing because they were sold out by the tide of history, just like we were in Vietnam and will be in Iraq and Afghanistan. Anyone who doesn't study the lessons learned here is an idiot.

You've completely missed the lesson if you think any of those wars will be won, or lost, on the small unit level. The Rhodesian's lost their war on the field of international politics, just like Iraq and Afghanistan will be lost.

No, you've missed the lesson. I do like how you've completely nullified your original argument (that we shouldn't study Rhodesia because they lost while we win) but keep arguing it. - You're aces in internet expertise!

All these wars were (or will be) lost because of the lack of will in the west. The Rhodesians however, were completely winning their war militarily until they ran out of resources... were as we have plenty of resources. We lose militarily because we do not follow through, something the Rhodesians were willing to do in spades. And their small unit tactics we much better. The military lesson in Rhodesia, and the geopolitical lesson is there for everyone to see.

Posted: 10/8/2011 8:44:11 AM EDT

[#35]

Quoted:

Quoted:

The US military STILL hasn't digested the Rhodesian military's lessons for dealing with insurgents. They are frankly light-years ahead of us.

You should reread the part where their war ends in defeat.

And how many insurgencies have we successfully fought? Ten years... are the Taliban defeated? How did that Vietnam thing go?

Truth is the Rhodiesian Army is an outstanding example of a force dedicated to COIN warfare. They did way better than we have ever done with far less resources... only losing because they were sold out by the tide of history, just like we were in Vietnam and will be in Iraq and Afghanistan. Anyone who doesn't study the lessons learned here is an idiot.

You've completely missed the lesson if you think any of those wars will be won, or lost, on the small unit level. The Rhodesian's lost their war on the field of international politics, just like Iraq and Afghanistan will be lost.

No, you've missed the lesson. I do like how you've completely nullified your original argument (that we shouldn't study Rhodesia because they lost while we win) but keep arguing it. - You're aces in internet expertise!

All these wars were (or will be) lost because of the lack of will in the west. The Rhodesians however, were completely winning their war militarily until they ran out of resources... were as we have plenty of resources. We lose militarily because we do not follow through, something the Rhodesians were willing to do in spades. And their small unit tactics we much better. The military lesson in Rhodesia, and the geopolitical lesson is there for everyone to see.

The Rhodesian war should be used as a case study. It has many lessons to be learned from it if people would be willing to use it. Unfortunatly it isn't used because race is involved in the war. The climate of our military now creates a huge pucker factor any time race is involved.

Posted: 10/8/2011 8:45:02 AM EDT

[#36]

Quoted:

Quoted:
I don't think that anything they did tactically was going to save the day.

But you can't disparage the tactics they used by noting they lost the war.

Aero Scout/Fire Force would be a hell of a lot better than driving around and getting our balls blown off by IEDs.

I certainly agree that air mobility (and every kind of mobility) is an underused asset in Afghanistan.

Posted: 10/8/2011 8:50:02 AM EDT

[#37]

Quoted:

Quoted:

The US military STILL hasn't digested the Rhodesian military's lessons for dealing with insurgents. They are frankly light-years ahead of us.

You should reread the part where their war ends in defeat.

And how many insurgencies have we successfully fought? Ten years... are the Taliban defeated? How did that Vietnam thing go?

Truth is the Rhodiesian Army is an outstanding example of a force dedicated to COIN warfare. They did way better than we have ever done with far less resources... only losing because they were sold out by the tide of history, just like we were in Vietnam and will be in Iraq and Afghanistan. Anyone who doesn't study the lessons learned here is an idiot.

You've completely missed the lesson if you think any of those wars will be won, or lost, on the small unit level. The Rhodesian's lost their war on the field of international politics, just like Iraq and Afghanistan will be lost.

No, you've missed the lesson. I do like how you've completely nullified your original argument (that we shouldn't study Rhodesia because they lost while we win) but keep arguing it. - You're aces in internet expertise!

All these wars were (or will be) lost because of the lack of will in the west. The Rhodesians however, were completely winning their war militarily until they ran out of resources... were as we have plenty of resources. We lose militarily because we do not follow through, something the Rhodesians were willing to do in spades. And their small unit tactics we much better. The military lesson in Rhodesia, and the geopolitical lesson is there for everyone to see.

The Rhodesian war should be used as a case study. It has many lessons to be learned from it if people would be willing to use it. Unfortunatly it isn't used because race is involved in the war. The climate of our military now creates a huge pucker factor any time race is involved.

Race is only injected because the West wants it injected. RAR-Elite Unit was African to include Officers being commissioned, MIU/Greys Scouts-Multi Racial, RhSAS- Multi Racial especially their Combat Trackers, Selous Scouts-Multi-racial BSAP-multi-racial, Game Rangers-multi-racial. 2/3's of the RhSf was african, but they don't want you know that. They also don't want you to know that African members were all volunteer, not conscripted or on National Service.

Posted: 10/8/2011 8:51:00 AM EDT

[#38]

Quoted:

Quoted:

The US military STILL hasn't digested the Rhodesian military's lessons for dealing with insurgents. They are frankly light-years ahead of us.

You should reread the part where their war ends in defeat.

And how many insurgencies have we successfully fought? Ten years... are the Taliban defeated? How did that Vietnam thing go?

Truth is the Rhodiesian Army is an outstanding example of a force dedicated to COIN warfare. They did way better than we have ever done with far less resources... only losing because they were sold out by the tide of history, just like we were in Vietnam and will be in Iraq and Afghanistan. Anyone who doesn't study the lessons learned here is an idiot.

You've completely missed the lesson if you think any of those wars will be won, or lost, on the small unit level. The Rhodesian's lost their war on the field of international politics, just like Iraq and Afghanistan will be lost.

No, you've missed the lesson. I do like how you've completely nullified your original argument (that we shouldn't study Rhodesia because they lost while we win) but keep arguing it. - You're aces in internet expertise!

All these wars were (or will be) lost because of the lack of will in the west. The Rhodesians however, were completely winning their war militarily until they ran out of resources... were as we have plenty of resources. We lose militarily because we do not follow through, something the Rhodesians were willing to do in spades. And their small unit tactics we much better. The military lesson in Rhodesia, and the geopolitical lesson is there for everyone to see.

I didn't say that at all. My meaning was that they lost regardless of their tactics. When you say, "All these wars were (or will be) lost because of the lack of will in the west." That is pretty much exactly what I meant, only I would take it a little farther.... The west didn't lack the will, the west was on the other side. The "west" got the result that they wanted in Rhodesia.

The same cultural factors are going to be at work in Afghanistan and Iraq as well.

Posted: 10/8/2011 8:53:41 AM EDT

[#39]

Quoted:

Quoted:

The US military STILL hasn't digested the Rhodesian military's lessons for dealing with insurgents. They are frankly light-years ahead of us.

You should reread the part where their war ends in defeat.

And how many insurgencies have we successfully fought? Ten years... are the Taliban defeated? How did that Vietnam thing go?

Truth is the Rhodiesian Army is an outstanding example of a force dedicated to COIN warfare. They did way better than we have ever done with far less resources... only losing because they were sold out by the tide of history, just like we were in Vietnam and will be in Iraq and Afghanistan. Anyone who doesn't study the lessons learned here is an idiot.

You've completely missed the lesson if you think any of those wars will be won, or lost, on the small unit level. The Rhodesian's lost their war on the field of international politics, just like Iraq and Afghanistan will be lost.

No, you've missed the lesson. I do like how you've completely nullified your original argument (that we shouldn't study Rhodesia because they lost while we win) but keep arguing it. - You're aces in internet expertise!

All these wars were (or will be) lost because of the lack of will in the west. The Rhodesians however, were completely winning their war militarily until they ran out of resources... were as we have plenty of resources. We lose militarily because we do not follow through, something the Rhodesians were willing to do in spades. And their small unit tactics we much better. The military lesson in Rhodesia, and the geopolitical lesson is there for everyone to see.

The Rhodesian war should be used as a case study. It has many lessons to be learned from it if people would be willing to use it. Unfortunatly it isn't used because race is involved in the war. The climate of our military now creates a huge pucker factor any time race is involved.

Not for this crazy guy. cut to the 9th page to save the boredom and get the point

http://usacac.army.mil/CAC2/MilitaryReview/Archives/English/MilitaryReview_20110831_art007.pdf

Posted: 10/8/2011 8:55:27 AM EDT

[#40]

Quoted:

Quoted:

The US military STILL hasn't digested the Rhodesian military's lessons for dealing with insurgents. They are frankly light-years ahead of us.

You should reread the part where their war ends in defeat.

I didn't say that at all. My meaning was that they lost regardless of their tactics. When you say, "All these wars were (or will be) lost because of the lack of will in the west." That is pretty much exactly what I meant, only I would take it a little farther.... The west didn't lack the will, the west was on the other side. The "west" got the result that they wanted in Rhodesia.

The same cultural factors are going to be at work in Afghanistan and Iraq as well.

Not how it came across.

Posted: 10/8/2011 8:56:44 AM EDT

[#41]

RhodesiaUnafraid.htm

Posted: 10/8/2011 8:57:34 AM EDT

[#42]

I've got a copy of a Rhodesian SF COIN manual... Very interesting reading.

Posted: 10/8/2011 9:01:54 AM EDT

[#43]

Quoted:

Quoted:

The US military STILL hasn't digested the Rhodesian military's lessons for dealing with insurgents. They are frankly light-years ahead of us.

You should reread the part where their war ends in defeat.

I didn't say that at all. My meaning was that they lost regardless of their tactics. When you say, "All these wars were (or will be) lost because of the lack of will in the west." That is pretty much exactly what I meant, only I would take it a little farther.... The west didn't lack the will, the west was on the other side. The "west" got the result that they wanted in Rhodesia.

The same cultural factors are going to be at work in Afghanistan and Iraq as well.

Not how it came across.

I see that.

I agree that we can make some tactical changes in Afghanistan. Like using our helicopters. Like getting the fuck out of our MRAPs and walking more. Like not waiting for the SF to do raids that are well within the ability of land owners, and just generally being more dynamic at the local level.

However, I think defeat or victory in Afghanistan is in the realm of the information war. We aren't even fighting that one.

The Rhodesians were fucked from the start, because their enemies had won the cultural war in the west.

Posted: 10/8/2011 9:03:34 AM EDT

[#44]

Quoted:

Quoted:

The US military STILL hasn't digested the Rhodesian military's lessons for dealing with insurgents. They are frankly light-years ahead of us.

You should reread the part where their war ends in defeat.

And how many insurgencies have we successfully fought? Ten years... are the Taliban defeated? How did that Vietnam thing go?

Truth is the Rhodiesian Army is an outstanding example of a force dedicated to COIN warfare. They did way better than we have ever done with far less resources... only losing because they were sold out by the tide of history, just like we were in Vietnam and will be in Iraq and Afghanistan. Anyone who doesn't study the lessons learned here is an idiot.

You've completely missed the lesson if you think any of those wars will be won, or lost, on the small unit level. The Rhodesian's lost their war on the field of international politics, just like Iraq and Afghanistan will be lost.

No, you've missed the lesson. I do like how you've completely nullified your original argument (that we shouldn't study Rhodesia because they lost while we win) but keep arguing it. - You're aces in internet expertise!

All these wars were (or will be) lost because of the lack of will in the west. The Rhodesians however, were completely winning their war militarily until they ran out of resources... were as we have plenty of resources. We lose militarily because we do not follow through, something the Rhodesians were willing to do in spades. And their small unit tactics we much better. The military lesson in Rhodesia, and the geopolitical lesson is there for everyone to see.

The Rhodesian war should be used as a case study. It has many lessons to be learned from it if people would be willing to use it. Unfortunatly it isn't used because race is involved in the war. The climate of our military now creates a huge pucker factor any time race is involved.

Race is only injected because the West wants it injected. RAR-Elite Unit was African to include Officers being commissioned, MIU/Greys Scouts-Multi Racial, RhSAS- Multi Racial especially their Combat Trackers, Selous Scouts-Multi-racial BSAP-multi-racial, Game Rangers-multi-racial. 2/3's of the RhSf was african, but they don't want you know that. They also don't want you to know that African members were all volunteer, not conscripted or on National Service.

Exactly,those are facts that get ignored on a regular basis. The fact that race plays a part in this war results in it being ignored and the lessons that could be learned are not. It is a failure in the military to not teach this war because it might offend somebody.

Posted: 10/8/2011 9:17:18 AM EDT

[#45]

Quoted:

Quoted:
http://www.paul-a-williams.com/assets/images/db_images/db_beamanamongmen1.jpg

Awesome recruiting poster.

I wish I could find that as a poster

I've seen it as a poster in another arfcommer's house, I'll ask him where he got it.

ETA: Did you try google?

http://www.memoriesofrhodesia.com/pages/other-sales/art-army.html

Will have to get one.

Posted: 10/8/2011 10:07:05 AM EDT

[#46]

Quoted:

Quoted:

The US military STILL hasn't digested the Rhodesian military's lessons for dealing with insurgents. They are frankly light-years ahead of us.

You should reread the part where their war ends in defeat.

And how many insurgencies have we successfully fought? Ten years... are the Taliban defeated? How did that Vietnam thing go?

Truth is the Rhodiesian Army is an outstanding example of a force dedicated to COIN warfare. They did way better than we have ever done with far less resources... only losing because they were sold out by the tide of history, just like we were in Vietnam and will be in Iraq and Afghanistan. Anyone who doesn't study the lessons learned here is an idiot.

You've completely missed the lesson if you think any of those wars will be won, or lost, on the small unit level. The Rhodesian's lost their war on the field of international politics, just like Iraq and Afghanistan will be lost.

No, you've missed the lesson. I do like how you've completely nullified your original argument (that we shouldn't study Rhodesia because they lost while we win) but keep arguing it. - You're aces in internet expertise!

All these wars were (or will be) lost because of the lack of will in the west. The Rhodesians however, were completely winning their war militarily until they ran out of resources... were as we have plenty of resources. We lose militarily because we do not follow through, something the Rhodesians were willing to do in spades. And their small unit tactics we much better. The military lesson in Rhodesia, and the geopolitical lesson is there for everyone to see.

The Rhodesian war should be used as a case study. It has many lessons to be learned from it if people would be willing to use it. Unfortunatly it isn't used because race is involved in the war. The climate of our military now creates a huge pucker factor any time race is involved.

Not for this crazy guy. cut to the 9th page to save the boredom and get the point

http://usacac.army.mil/CAC2/MilitaryReview/Archives/English/MilitaryReview_20110831_art007.pdf

Thats racist

I completly agree with you that we need a greater tactical airlift from my Air Force. We have spent millions up amoring and buying MRAPs for a mission that could be done safer and quicker with a C-27 or a censna.

We are spending billions to fly bombers and fighters around and they are getting orders from the JAOC in another country. While a taco might be the ideal fit for the airframe for this mission. The heart of the problem is systemic not technical. The greatest change needs to come in the layers of command approval needed to get an air strike approved.

Posted: 10/8/2011 10:23:46 AM EDT

[#47]

Quoted:I completly agree with you that we need a greater tactical airlift from my Air Force. We have spent millions up amoring and buying MRAPs for a mission that could be done safer and quicker with a C-27 or a censna.

We are spending billions to fly bombers and fighters around and they are getting orders from the JAOC in another country. While a taco might be the ideal fit for the airframe for this mission. The heart of the problem is systemic not technical. The greatest change needs to come in the layers of command approval needed to get an air strike approved.

Agreed on all.
But if we can do the mission much cheaper, bonus

An F16 with 2 hours on station with a single pilot at 10K AGL going 500 knots is much worse at this mission than a two seat turbo prop at 2K AGL at 250 knots. And 19K an hour for an F16 versus 1.5K an hour for a LAAR.
Better, cheaper, safer.

Posted: 10/8/2011 10:31:10 AM EDT

[#48]

Quoted:

Quoted:I completly agree with you that we need a greater tactical airlift from my Air Force. We have spent millions up amoring and buying MRAPs for a mission that could be done safer and quicker with a C-27 or a censna.

We are spending billions to fly bombers and fighters around and they are getting orders from the JAOC in another country. While a taco might be the ideal fit for the airframe for this mission. The heart of the problem is systemic not technical. The greatest change needs to come in the layers of command approval needed to get an air strike approved.

Agreed on all.

But if we can do the mission much cheaper, bonus

An F16 with 2 hours on station with a single pilot at 10K AGL going 500 knots is much worse at this mission than a two seat turbo prop at 2K AGL at 250 knots. And 19K an hour for an F16 versus 1.5K an hour for a LAAR.

Better, cheaper, safer.

Even this would be cheaper at a $10 mil unit price:

http://www.ar15.com/forums/t_1_5/1235449_South_African_produced_Light_Attack_Aircraft.html

Posted: 10/8/2011 10:45:08 AM EDT

[#49]

Quoted:

Quoted:I completly agree with you that we need a greater tactical airlift from my Air Force. We have spent millions up amoring and buying MRAPs for a mission that could be done safer and quicker with a C-27 or a censna.

We are spending billions to fly bombers and fighters around and they are getting orders from the JAOC in another country. While a taco might be the ideal fit for the airframe for this mission. The heart of the problem is systemic not technical. The greatest change needs to come in the layers of command approval needed to get an air strike approved.

Agreed on all.
But if we can do the mission much cheaper, bonus

An F16 with 2 hours on station with a single pilot at 10K AGL going 500 knots is much worse at this mission than a two seat turbo prop at 2K AGL at 250 knots. And 19K an hour for an F16 versus 1.5K an hour for a LAAR.
Better, cheaper, safer.

Even this would be cheaper at a $10 mil unit price:

http://www.ar15.com/forums/t_1_5/1235449_South_African_produced_Light_Attack_Aircraft.html

that thing is way over priced.
Tuco B Model off the shelf is 5 million.