Iraq parallel to EaW

[Naja]

I'm going to do my best to make this as apolitical a thread as possible, I'd ask the same from everyone else. This is strictly a strategic comparison for the game.

 

But yes. I was thinking about this today, about how the creators of EaW have intended not only for the Empire and the Rebellion to have drastically different units, but equally different styles of play. The Empire, for example, is much too noticeable to try stealth, but with the benefit of its mass armies of elite troops, it can wreak total havoc wherever and whenever it wants. The Rebellion is smaller and much more decentralized, and since a conventional battle against Imperial forces would be suicidal, it relies on hit and run guerilla warfare to gradually bleed the Empire dry.

 

What better parallel in today's world than Iraq! I am not implying that the United States is an evil empire, nor that the insurgents are liberty-craving do-gooders like in the Star Wars saga; the real world obfuscates such easy polarities really quickly when it comes to war. But what I am saying is that strategically, the two make a very good illustration of the faction balance that we will probably see in Empire at War.

 

No army on this earth can face America in a conventional war. America devotes more money towards military funding than all European nations combined, and therefore has one of the most technologically advanced, well-trained, and well-supplied armies the world has ever seen. Against another standing army (like Saddam's), it is only a matter of time until it crumbles before American might. However, large armies throughout history have always had trouble with smaller, more decentralized guerilla forces that don't play according to the rules. The Iraqi insurgency, much like the VietCong, is an unskilled, rag-tag group of young people determined to oust an occupier (or in the case of the Rebellion, to restore the Republic; same difference). They would never dare facing American forces out in the open, for fear of being wiped out in one swift stroke. So instead, they use their intimate knowledge of the land and the cityscape to nibble away, little by little, at their enemy's armies, hoping to bleed them slowly rather than outright confronting them.

 

Just as the burden of American forces rests on forcing the insurgents into situations where they have no choice but to be trapped in an open confrontation, so must the Empire do to the Rebels. As equally frustrating to the American leadership as it is to the Imperials is how both insurgencies lack a central leadership structure, and therefore can theoretically indefinately perpetuate themselves in their fight against the larger professional force unless totally wiped out. Just as the burden of the Iraqis is to lay low, pick off soldiers one by one, and bleed the Americans over time of their money, manpower, and will to continue the fight, so must the Rebellion keep a low profile on each planet they may be hiding on, taking advantage of the intelligence they know of about the Empire's monolithic fortresses and holdings, and keeping the Imperials guessing, trying to stretch the Empire's forces thin to make them vulnerable to hit-and-run attack after hit-and-run attack.

 

Thoughts, gentlemen?

[Foshjedi2004]

Well I will go political. The United Kingdom pre-1910 was the Empire incarnate. We controlled vast swathes of the Planet and what happened?? We were taken apart by small groups of people in long leaf dresses with inferior weapons!!

[Naja]

*A joke*

 

Q: "Why does the sun never set on the British Empire?"

 

A: "Because God doesn't trust them."

 

[Foshjedi2004]

No because we control everyone. Not by political power but economically and comercially.

[Cain]

I don't think the rebels will ever use terorist tactics and kill civilians.

 

The Rebels have a political aim and fight for justice.

 

The insurgents are a bunch or retarded people driven by fanatism ignorance and stupidity.

 

Is the US Army or the US Democracy perfect ?! - Loll - of course not but I least they try to be as long as it is in accordance with their goals.

 

Imagine the German WWII army in Iraq - will we had an insurgency now ? Loll - no way - the SS will deal with that in a matter of weeks.

 

Off topic:

The US Democracy is not the athenian one it is actually the spartan one politicaly speaking cause military the US is not even close to the spartan quality of the soldier.

 

Also I believe that the US increased dependency on PCs and and computers creates and oportunity for a knock out blow. If someone creates a super virus that can move true electricity without actually useing normal files and such, to infect PCs and tehnical equipement by createing it self in a normal virus behind the defences at a certain date - then the US will army will be frozen ...etc.

 

I'm not a particular fan of the US army ... mainly because their incompetence to deal with the terrorists and their dependence on the political establishment. Also their PR still sucks.

 

Non the less if the US army will not exist as it is now - we will have had chaos in the world.

 

So becouse nobody is perfect I can turn a blind eye to the american military strategy of influence and roamn stile conquest.

[Stellar_Magic]

Cain are you half asleep? Your typing seems kind of sloppy...

 

Off topic:

The US Democracy is not the athenian one it is actually the spartan one politicaly speaking cause military the US is not even close to the spartan quality of the soldier.

 

Also I believe that the US increased dependency on PCs and and computers creates and oportunity for a knock out blow. If someone creates a super virus that can move true electricity without actually useing normal files and such, to infect PCs and tehnical equipement by createing it self in a normal virus behind the defences at a certain date - then the US will army will be frozen ...etc.

 

I'm not a particular fan of the US army ... mainly because their incompetence to deal with the terrorists and their dependence on the political establishment. Also their PR still sucks.

 

Non the less if the US army will not exist as it is now - we will have had chaos in the world.

 

So becouse nobody is perfect I can turn a blind eye to the american military strategy of influence and roamn stile conquest.

 

Well a couple of points, the Athenian Democracy was just as or more militant then the Spartans...

 

The US army is arguably the best trained and equipped in the world, but its not designed to fight Terrorists but to fight a conventional war against a conventional foe (I think Army planners are starring at China as the next big threat.) Still they get the job done.

 

In terms of performance in peace keeping operations however the British actually perform better then the US. No wonder violence in the British zone of occupation is relatively rare.

 

Conquest? Wars of conquest are so 19th Century. Most every nation that has started a war for land or territory since the start of 1900 has been the side thats lost. While it could be said that a Democratic Iraq would side with the US and provide us with Oil they wouldn't necessarily be a portion of an American Empire.

[Naja]

I was aiming for an apolitical thread...

 

I don't think the rebels will ever use terorist tactics and kill civilians.

 

I already said, I'm not equating the Rebels and the insurgents in the same boat in terms of nobility. It's obvious that the Rebels are noble because they exist in the storyline of Star Wars, which is the classic good vs. evil dichotomy. In the real world, good vs. evil is very hard to find, especially in war. The Islamic fundamentalists fight for what they believe is freedom to them, and some of them blow themselves up in the midst of civilians. We fight for what we believe to be liberation, and some of our top officials order prisoners of war to be sexually humiliated and tortured. See how the black and white vanishes?

 

The Rebels have a political aim and fight for justice.

 

While the insurgents can use very terrible means (like civilian bombing), their goal is verymuch political! They seek to oust American troops from Iraq, and more than likely to establish a Muslim theocracy if that is accomplished. A lot of Americans don't see the point in understanding their enemy, and it really will be our downfall in Iraq unless we can start to do so.

 

The insurgents are a bunch or retarded people driven by fanatism ignorance and stupidity.

 

And you don't see fanaticism, ignorance, and stupidity in some American troops? In Bush himself, who claimed that God told him to "strike against Saddam" ? There's still a bunch of people who believe that Saddam still has WMDs. There's a certain secretary of defense who exclaimed how we would be "greeted as liberators" ... Again, black and white comparisons usually have no place in war.

 

All I'm saying is that an us good/them bad attitude is not only a naive way of interpreting a war, it is often disasterous, strategically. If we understand what compells some Iraqis and other Middle Easterners to become insurgents, we know another way to defeat them and end the insurgency. But if we just sit back and attribute their actions to "they're barbaric," and stop there, all we've accomplished is to convince ourselves further of our own righteousness - doing so wins us no victories in this ever-escalating war.

[Cain]

Ok I quit My enghlish skills don't allow me to go to deep to confront you guys .... Naja take on Stellar he will be a good debate oponent.

 

Hey Stellar I still believe that the US army is not so cool in terms of soldiers quality nor high command. And no way athenians were more militaristic than sparta.

[Gen.Vader]

ya, with sparta they trained boys from like 5 and they fought for the rest of thier lives, so how is athens, the law making state more militaristicthan sparta? they had a good navy, but i bet they didnt take children and make em row in the tiremes.

 

The US Democracy is not the athenian one it is actually the spartan one politicaly speaking cause military the US is not even close to the spartan quality of the soldier.

 

i would love to see the day where a few hundred 300-400 marines could hold off thousands and thousands of troops. *sigh* thermoppalye was one shining light in the history of sparta. too bad we dont have any spartan thinking leaders, but then again, i like being home at the age of 10

[Naja]

I apologize if it came off as a debate, Cain. I just get a little self-competitive when it comes to keeping up on the issues, and sometimes it rubs off on people. My bad.

 

Sparta was interesting. Wasn't a true democracy (not all of the people had electoral power) or a true republic (no elected representatives), but an oligarchy of several aristocrats that were elected by a council on an annual basis, I believe.

 

If I would compare the U.S. to one of the two Greek cities, it would be Athens. While we are not a democracy (we are a republic), the burden of every citizen is -not- to learn to fight...the burden on American citizens isn't to really do all that much, these days.

 

Irrelevant fact: did you know what the etymology of the word "idiot" is? It comes from the Athenian "idiotes," not meaning one of inferior intelligence as we take "idiot" to mean, but literally "one who is ignorant of politics." Lots of idiotes in America.

[Cain]

I apologize if it came off as a debate, Cain.

 

 

Don't worry I just said I didn't stand a chance to win Your arguments are cooler than mine