Why are American generals historically so shit?

They led the way in conflict not international relations and politiking

*blocks your path*

The U.S. military officer corps, hell, even the NCO corps, starts to rely more on political competence, and less on leadership, tactical, and strategic skill, the higher up the chain you move, so that by the time they make general officer, the overwhelming majority of them lack any strategic skill outside of how to kiss ass and say "yes sir" in order to keep their job and move further up the chain.

The united states is the only post WW II military that wins the overwhelming majority of their tactical fights while losing almost every single strategic fight they get into, and that's because they lack strategic leadership.

>that's because they lack strategic leadership.
Because the leader of the US military is a civilian who usually doesn't know jack shit aout the military.

Doesn't matter.

Talented leaders would understand the problems associated with having a bunch of corrupt, incompetent politicians in charge of the budget strings, and would still prevail.

Implying the president doesn't listen to his military advisors and largely does what they say.

It's like this in any sort of hierarchy though. Any time you're in charge of large groups of people there's always going to be a certain amount of political bullshit involved

Right.

But that same political bullshit existed throughout our history, and yet it's only after WW II that our military leaders failed to achieve strategic victory despite our ground and air forces achieving tactical victories everywhere they fought.

After WW II, the size of our military was significantly reduced....except for the officer corps. The ratio of senior officers, especially general officers, remained ridiculously high, and almost to the point that we've had the same number of general officers as we did in WW II despite our military being less than 1/10 the size. Our general officers don't even follow the fucking doctrine they write and approve.

Just look at how they caved in to the leftists that wanted open faggotry in the ranks, and women in front line units. That clearly demonstrates how fucking shit our leadership truly is at the senior level.

>loses strategically

America doesn't care about winning or losing so much as it doesn't like sitting back and letting awful shit happen to countries that need help.

>a small list of countries we've armed Russia, England, France, Israel, worst Korea, s.vietnam

Doesn't matter how hated or misunderstood we might be, fuck with us and we'll kill you.

thank mr nato

This must be b8

>Just look at how they caved in to the leftists that wanted open faggotry in the ranks
stfo people said the same thing about them letting negros and jews into the military. Ultimately the military is going to do whatever is going to give it the best operational edge and if you don't like that your unit isn't a bunch of spoiled white protestants like you, you can cram it up your ass and keep your dumb ass thoughts to yourself.

>trusting americans to be useful in wartime

LOL

Look mom I posted it again.

was your grandpa one of them brave boys killed by literally nothing at Kiska?

LOLOLOLOLOL

>want to join NATO.
There's simple explanation for that

> LOL look the country that won the war and forced all opposing sides into an unconditional surrender had an accident occur while attacking what they believed to be an enemy force

Yep, the U.S. Military being flat out superior to the Russian military in all field as well as the U.S. having the strongest economy in the world are probably the two most correct answers

And I can tell you what it is. The desire to be as far away from Russian shithole as it's possible.

>referencing a war that happened 70 + years ago won by a country that no longer exists

Times have changed gramps, get off the internet. These colors don't run. USA is still here and USSR isn't.

There once was

> Loses strategically
> Won the Cold War to become unrivaled hegemon for the next two decades

based

I'm sure (((they))) had nothing to do with his jeep accident either

or his death after his recovery

Because they always fought with overwhelming aerial supremacy

There is no .jpg, there is only a .png

They don't tho. Most U.S. Presidents have historically ignored their military advisors because they didn't trust the military.

Not always a bad thing though, during the Cuban Missile crisis a section of Kennedy's cabinet was pressuring him to go to war with Cuba

Which in hindsight was the right thing to do. The missiles in Cuba didn't pose near as much of a threat as Kennedy thought due to limited range and the Soviet Union's lack of a forward positioned nuclear arsenal meant that Khrushchev was bluffing hardcore hoping the U.S. would back down. Not that the outcome was necessarily BAD, mind you, but it could have been much, much better.

It's all a big game of ifs but there is still the chance that had we invaded Cuba a missile could have reached Florida which would've irreparably damaged the reputation of the U.S. even if it hadn't let to a nuclear holocaust.

Conversely that invasion would've been a major embarrassment to Russia and that could've pressured them to react more aggressively in another part of the world. Regardless though I think we ended up with the best outcome that could come out of the situation

>which would've irreparably damaged the reputation of the U.S.
How do you figure? If anything it would just galvanize the Cold Warriors. On top of this, by the time the actual Cuban Missile Crisis happened, Khrushchev had already smuggled the missiles out of Cuba. It was the biggest bluff of the Cold War.

>quoting a general who is a meme even by American standards because his greatest accomplishment was producing bloviating soundbites which gets conservatives' penises hard.
>not posting the true under-sung American general who people don't remember even though his soldiers adored him because he wasn't a flapping jackass with an ego problem

This is retarded

The cold war was essentially a political/economic conflict. It wasn't won by generals.

I agree with

Anyone high up in the military is just a fucking politician who's job consists more of dealing with anti-rape programs and making up new retarded physical fitness reqs than executing strategy.

I think the solution would be to improve strategic education and promote offices to flag positions based on strategic capability.

*blocks your path*
*slaughters 50,000 Chinese in the process*

Under-sung perhaps but the man was mediocre at best. So many fuck ups coming from that man, most notable his decision to place his HQ in Luxembourg just for prestige and when that meant he was pretty much cut off from his own armies Monty had to step in an save his ass during the ardennes.
If I remember it right he even threatened to resign over this, embarrassing him even further, and Eisenhower had to put him back in his place

>said the same thing about them letting negros and jews into the military.

Apparently you're head is so far up your ass you can't see to read any history books.

Integration happened in 47' as a result of Truman madating it, and ee have lost EVERY major engagement we have entered in ever since. What does that tell you about the "integrated" force?

Regardless, faggots and females introduce sexual relationships in the organization, blacks don't, and it's the dynamics of the sexual relationships that absolutely destroys cohesion. Combine that with mental and physical weakness of females, and you have a recipe for disaster, failed missions, decreased efficiency and effectiveness, and greater costs for the tax payer.

The addition of females to combat support, and combat service and support units has made them all worse, and they'll make the combat arms units they infect worse as well. So will open faggotry.

>USA is still here and USSR isn't.

1/3 of the nation are shitskins that hate whites and want to create a welfare state with white tax dollars. Bitches have infected every aspect of our government, and nation, lowering the standards of everything, and are on the sides of the shitskins and foreigners. Our military has been turned into a leftist liberal arts college campus....with guns. Our media and entertainment industry pump out anti-white / anti-freedom propaganda 24/7.

What the fuck did we win by "winning" the cold war again?

>Implying the president doesn't listen to his military advisors

They don't.

Here's how it works:
1. Politicians fail miserably to do something through the use of diplomacy.
2. Politicians decide on a military option and consult military for courses of action.
3. Politicians choose the course of action that is the most politically expedient, despite not being strategically sound, or even possible.
4. Military leaders tell politicians their plan won't work due to lack of troop strength or logistics provided, stupid strategy, whatever...
5. Politicians get rid of "pessimist" military leaders in favor of those willing to toe the party line.

This has been the case since post WWII.

>>>>>Implying

>What does that tell you about the "integrated" force?
That proxy wars in an age of nuclear weapons tend to be difficult, drawn out affairs, subject to intense international diplomatic scrutiny you reductionist retard. Because there hasn't been a Fascist chimp-out since the 1930's.
And none of those conflicts were lost because of a lack of operational efficiency on behalf of the soldiers, it's not like American tanks were being outflanked and destroyed outside of Saigon as elite Vietnamese commandos overran American fortifications. Americans pulled out because these wars were turning into unproductive blood and treasure pits and had turned into a burdensome political liability back home.

When you look at conflicts like say, the incident in Mogadishu, people act like America got its ass kicked when it had a kill ration of 1000 to 1 and a few stranded American commandos held off an entire city of hostile soldiers.

>Regardless, faggots and females introduce sexual relationships in the organization,
you sound like an insecure little bitch who can't handle the pressure of behaving professionally in a mixed environment. There's a valid discussion to be made about women in combat roles but the 90% of military roles should go to the most meritorious candidate, not the one who adheres to the right physical identity.

The US has actually had some pretty good generals if you look beyond the meme ones like MacArthur or Patton.

But one thing the US is gravely underrated for is Admirals though. You looked at the Pacific Theater in WW2 and holy shit did people like Nimitz, Spruance, Halsey, Mitscher, Fletcher, Lee kick tons of ass.

Not him, but are you seriously implying that women behave professionally in the military? Have you ever been in the U.S. military? Women absolutely do not behave professionally or are they rarely ever the most meritorious candidate. Most get into their positions by being held to a lower standard or purposely going out and getting knocked up so they don't have to go on deployment and thus forcing more meritorious candidates out of their job so the military can find a spot for them stateside. Women in the military was a massive fucking mistake and any vet will tell you that.

Also
>inb4 Grace Hopper
Hopper was a fucking unicorn.

against shitty japanese navy that also had almost zero worthwhile aerial support

> shitty Japanese navy that had managed to BTFO the Royal Navy

> Somehow being smart enough to adopt naval air tactics is a bad thing
Inferior naval power detected, your IP has just been sent to the nearest carrier group

Except for the Japanese actually had an advantage in the early parts of the war and was the leading navy in carrier ops(before the US pulled ahead of course).

>you sound like an insecure little bitch who can't handle the pressure of behaving professionally in a mixed environment.

You sound like an amateur that has no knowledge of, or experience with, human behavior and interpersonal relationships in a lethal environment....or an idiot.

I can't tell, really.

>313 dead

Yes I have, and I knew many fine soldiers who were women. The only "vets" and actual soldiers I knew who had a problem with them were the minority of insecure little bitches. No matter where I've worked, in the public or private sector, you get blue collar men who bitch about having to compete with women for the gigs because you put the boys in the field where they can put all those "do you even lift, bro?" skills of to good use, which happens to be unglamorous, low-paying bitch-work, and you put the females in the offices because they tend to be better at rote tedious tasks, they're cleaner, and you're less likely to catch them taking 20 minute breaks in the bathroom sitting on the toilets with their phones. You get slackers and hustlers of both genders.

>in a lethal environment
ha, it's like you only read the first sentence of that statement and sperged out without comprehending the very next sentence where I specifically mentioned the conversation about women in combat roles being 100% legitimate
>I can't tell, really.
nice opinions you got there, bro

>and you put the females in the offices because they tend to be better at rote tedious tasks, they're cleaner, and you're less likely to catch them taking 20 minute breaks in the bathroom sitting on the toilets with their phones
t. Never actually worked with women let alone been in the military

>t. Never actually worked with women let alone been in the military
t. insecure little bitch. You can't be older than 21 or 22, maybe even just had your heart broken for the first time.

I've literally worked with them in every single job I've ever had. I've had some truly great female co-workers and some exceptionally shitty ones. After a while son, you'll learn that someone's physical identity has absolutely no bearing on their professionalism.

>nice opinions you got there, bro

Fact, eunuch. Fact. It's called biology.

Males and females have a biological impact on each other that does not exist on all male, or female, teams. This biology destroys cohesion, and makes everything they do worse than any all male team. Faggots are subject to the same issues.

That's why we've excluded females from combat for millennia, and why faggotry has never been tolerated in any decent military.

>early parts of the war

you mean pearl harbor?

royal navy was fighting the u-boats around their island

oh wait do you also think americans fought the main german force in europe as well?

>insecure little bitch

Seeing somebody use "insecure", or "projecting", is a sure sign that you're dealing with a submissive beta male, feminist, or homosexual.

>only argument is adhom
Meanwhile, in the real world, women are less productive than men and are very bad for order in the workplace.

huffingtonpost.com/peggy-drexler/women-might-not-be-the-be_b_2917229.html
irle.berkeley.edu/files/2006/Are-Female-Workers-Less-Productive-Than-Male-Workers.pdf

Again, you've never worked with women. Your comments prove you've never been in the military. Take your delusions and lock them in your parents basement where your white knight fantasies can stay a reality.

was waiting for him to show up...10/10.

Army isn't the only service with generals...

There's a criticism to be had for LeMay regarding the focus on SAC which led to the USAF having little to no CAS or TAC bombers for Vietnam until late into the war, but really that criticism comes down to CinC not letting them work in the role they had carved out for themselves thus forcing them to recreate a doctrine on the fly.

>women are less productive than men

Every military study clearly demonstrated that females spend more time on sick call, and profile, than their male counterparts. This is due to their inability to physically meet the same demands as men, resulting in a decrease in efficiency, effectiveness, and greater cost to the tax payer as they are forced to pay out for females physically injured in military service at greater rates than men.

Females have done nothing but make our military worse.

I'm glad I did my time, survived, and got the fuck out.

Curtis "it ain't a warcrime if you win" LeMay.

who figures the best way to deal with japan is to just firebomb civilian population centers.

Well, it worked.

>completely gut a countries industrial capacity because they built it out of wood and paper
>people get mad that you dared to bomb industrial centers because there were people there
Absolutely no fucks given. Legitimate targets all around.

The nukes worked, and killed fewer innocent civilians than the fire bombing.

>innocent

Go away /pol/

>Implying Tokyo was targeted for any reason other than population density

>Implying you're not a bigot

>you mean pearl harbor?
The Japanese had the advantage very early on before the US kicked into full industrial overdrive. Add to that the fact most of their carrier pilots were veterans from the campaign in China.

>royal navy was fighting the u-boats around their island

>oh wait do you also think americans fought the main german force in europe as well?
The Brits basically begged for the USN to help them out with the Battle of the Atlantic.

>implying you're not just a salty weeb that thinks that Tokyo wasn't targeted over it's industrial capacity but because instead because it had a lot muh most honorabu nipnongs who dindu nuffin

>The Brits basically begged for the USN to help them out with the Battle of the Atlantic
On top of this, the U.S. was controlling half of the Atlantic for the Brits against the Germans months before the U.S. even entered the conflict

Honestly, his existence just proved how garbage MacArthur was. MacArthur was raving about how they needed to nuke China to win. His appointees like Almond had various excuses for their poor performance ranging from Chinese having 100-1 numerical superiority (they didn't) to their soldiers being useless because they were minorities. Ridgway promptly came in and proved that all they needed to do was exercise basic fucking competence. He sacked dozens of MacArthur's officers, straightened the whole UN force out, and kicked China's face in, only not pushing them back into Manchuria because he politics mandated that there be no further escalation by re-invasion and he was ordered to only hold the 38th parallel.

It's nowhere near as well known as other U.S. defeats, but I'd nominate the first few months of China's intervention as the worst U.S. defeat in history due to how many reverses they suffered against a force so far inferior in equipment. And that can mostly be blamed on MacArthur.

>what is the Indian Ocean Raid

The Japanese were light years ahead of the RN in carrier ops. They had better heavy cruisers too.

good thing you spawned that gigantic fleet out of thin air in months time then, all the while crushing the germans in the atlantic

>just firebomb civilian population centers.

And?

It worked. As did the targeting in Germany.

We stopped doing that and haven't won shit ever since.

North Korea and Vietnam should have been made a smoking ruin. Baghdad should be complete rubble, as should Kabul, Kandahar, and J-bad.

The fact U.S. politicians and "leaders" are more concerned about civilian casualties instead of victory, and their own troops, is exactly why the U.S. fails.

That doesn't refute anything written in that post.

>Supreme Allied Commander

>North Korea

The Americans dropped more bombs on that tiny peninsula than they did in the whole Pacific Theater of WW2. They literally ran things to bomb in Korea since there was nothing left. You don't know what you're talking about.

Dunno ask

Look at you chest thumping retards, acting all tough and shit over the internet. Seriously, how old are you kids? 20? 21? put it back in your pants

stripes.com/news/panetta-joint-chiefs-unanimous-on-dropping-ban-on-women-in-combat-1.205127
Oh, look at that, the Joint Chiefs are unanimous in their decision to drop the ban. But what do all those filthy liberals in the the military top brass know about the real world?
taskandpurpose.com/women-can-outperform-many-men-infantry-get/
written by a combat vet
>sandiegouniontribune.com/military/sdut-marines-report-to-commandant-women-in-combat-2015sep23-htmlstory.html
Nobody's doubting the real risks, but these are problems that are going to be solved by smart officers, not dumb grunts

Pic semi-related: the most successful cavalry force that history has ever known openly encouraged homosexual relationships between its members (not that that's a preferable arrangement to detached professionalism.) You kids will learn someday. Or you'll retreat back into the forest where you won't be a danger to anyone but yourselves.

>not that that's a preferable arrangement to detached professionalism
It is, though.

>Joint Chiefs
Joint Chiefs are so far removed from any sort of combat role that they couldn't tell their ass from their elbow. See the fucking Bradley for an example

>some women can out perform some men
Bellcurve says those people are a very tiny outlier and your cherry picking does NOT change that fact.

>Nobody's doubting the real risks, but these are problems that are going to be solved by smart officers, not dumb grunts
More proof that this is a very fucking stupid play. You and the military admit it is opening up the military to a fuckton of SIGNIFICANT risks. The smart military play is to not allow it at all, but here we are. Great risk for little to no benefit. Very well argued point about why we should allow a very stupid idea to come to fruition.

>posting an irrelevant cavalry unit that was outdone by their betters who didn't fuck each other in the ass
Well done.

>1/3 of the nation are shitskins that hate whites
Do you really think that all minorities hate whites?
>want to create a welfare state with white tax dollars.
This is why white by an incredible incredibe majority countries in Europe are democratic socialist while America is more capitalist? Makes no sense.
>Bitches have infected every aspect of our government, and nation, lowering the standards of everything, and are on the sides of the shitskins and foreigners.
Prove that women in office are less efficient. Prove that women are the force behind lowering standards and tell me what standards are lowering.
>Our military has been turned into a leftist liberal arts college campus....with guns.
Explain why the military is overwhelmingly conservative if it is a leftist college campus. Explain why America is at its military tactical prime.
>Our media and entertainment industry pump out anti-white / anti-freedom propaganda 24/7
Show me an example of anti-white propaganda. Explain the huge popularity of patriotic military films whose primary theme is usually the preservation of freedom.

I don't think it is the militaries fault that they "lose" all the wars they get involved in. Ever since korea the US has been too bogged down by limited warfare to have clear war goals. They win overwhelmingly in terms of battles, casualties, destruction and disruption. Tactically tey do everything right but when your war goal is something as vague as "peace and stability in the middle east" you are fucked out of the gate.

>Look at you chest thumping retards

Says the beta white knight.

>Joint Chiefs are unanimous in their decision

Which goes right back to this post>Anyone with the integrity to tell the truth and go against the leftist party line has been purged. Their careers are more important to them than the mission, and the men they send to fight and die to execute their shitty plans.

They would gladly accept mongoloid retards in service if they were told to do so...because they don't have to work with them, fight with them, or die with them.

>these are problems that are going to be solved
No, they're not, because you don't "solve" biology, you just ignore it the way faggots and leftists do. Nothing will be "solved". Units, and our military, will be worse, regardless of the leftist shills, support pog's, and faggots they get to say otherwise.

Only a selfish cunt would sacrifice the integrity of our military, and our nation, to placate their own ego.

>most successful cavalry force that history has ever known openly encouraged homosexual relationships

Says who, the faggots pushing an agenda?

There's historians that have demonstrated that "gay" units were a punishment in antiquity, and used as fodder to spare the normal men. They've also demonstrated that the "love" the agenda pushers always claim existed in some of those units was just camaraderie being intentionally misinterpreted by faggots trying to normalize their birth defects.

You've never even been in combat, have you, sunshine? If you served, you couldn't have been anything other than some rear echelon FOB monkey, and little more than another welfare in uniform support toad.

What is the sacred band?

>Do you really think that all minorities hate whites?
They don't have to, as there's enough that do.

>This is why white by an incredible incredibe majority countries in Europe
Wait...you mean the people that were considered serfs and ruled by "aristocrats" and "royalty" have a different opinion about government than the people that fled those shitholes to live in the freedom created by American self-sufficiency and opportunity? Amazing. I wonder how many of those precious Euro shitholes would still be living in their socialist utopias if Uncle Sugar didn't foot the defensive bill to keep the Soviets from raping them and showing them what REAL "socialism" actually looked like.

>Prove that women in office are less efficient. Prove that women are the force behind lowering standards and tell me what standards are lowering.
The fact that the federal government MANDATES hiring females clearly demonstrates their inferiority compared to men. The fact that EVERY agency that required some kind of physical demands for employment were FORCED to have lower standards to accommodate females also demonstrates their inferiority.

If women were worth hiring, they would be hired without need of legal mandates, but they're not.

>Explain why the military is overwhelmingly conservative
Was? Sure. Is? I don't know. Obama purged countless good men, and it will take years to unfuck the damage.

>Explain why America is at its military tactical prime.
Because front line fighting companies and SOF organizations still reject the rampant leftist programming and propaganda pushed on them by their leftist overlords and "yes men". There jobs require actual cohesion and physical performance, so the leftist pretense doesn't fly in the real world they live in.

>Show me an example of anti-white propaganda. Explain the huge popularity of patriotic military films whose primary theme is usually the preservation of freedom.

Pic related.

We're done, pumpkin.

A myth propagated by modern faggots in an attempt to normalize their unfortunate birth affliction.

>They don't have to, as there's enough that do.
To do what? Riot in the streets in a few cities? Minorities have been manageable for all of American history. You have yet to prove that "shitskins" as a class generally dislike whites.
>people that fled those shitholes to live in the freedom created by American self-sufficiency and opportunity?
You moved that goalposts fast. You said minorities as a class wanted a welfare state. You just ceded that ethnicity has no inherent link to sponsorship of welfare systems.
>The fact that the federal government MANDATES hiring females clearly demonstrates their inferiority compared to men.
Women have been hired far before that, especially in factories. Women have historically been barred from entry into administration because of preconceived notions of their worth rather than nominal results. This is still besides the point, however. In elected office, which I assumed you were talking about (since your post was about US government) there are no quotas for gender. The women who have a meaningful amount of control over our government are there because they are competent politicians.
Most jobs in the US don't involve heavy physical labor, and most that do have incredibly few women per capita. You have yet to show me an example where standards lowered have decreased quality of an industry or branch of government.
>Obama purged countless good men
Obama's the black one, not the one with the hat and bushy mustache. Obama did not preform purges.
>Because front line fighting companies and SOF organizations still reject the rampant leftist programming
In other words, the military is nothing like what you said it is.
>Pic related
And this shows that America as a nation propagandizes anti-white attitudes? If I link a Daily Stormer page is that proof that America supports the KKK? Free press means that there canot be true national propaganda. You didn't respond to the second part.

>nuking china would've been a bad thing

>royal navy was fighting the u-boats around their island

Correct, and until the USN came into the picture the RN wasn't doing much else besides dedicating entire fleet to watching/chasing big ships.
Also the RN wasn't exclusively in the Atlantic, they were fighitng in the Pacific for a brief time but the fact that they were too retarded to reinforce Singapore allowed the eternal nip to kick them out