Thank goodness someone brought this up so I could use this meme. Thanks, man, I appreciate you.
What’s happening in Iran?
- Thread starter CQB
- Start date
Major war games like this one often take place "in the future," with future weapons. We did a big Pacific-focused exercise last year that took place in the future, and there were some pretty high-tech (not-yet-existent) weapons and capabilities on both sides. That could account for the discrepancy.
I was happy he was doing that, too. That was WAY smarter than going in heavy on the ground. He made a good decision on that front, especially when it came to Syria.
Just reading actual CON/FLUSH/Ex plans sometimes makes me worry that I am not the smartest person in any room.
Lots of pieces/parts get reported and don’t make sense.
That’s the thing I can’t freaking get.
Obama did his for 8 years. Eight. And I’d be willing to say we avoided a full scale conflict because of his willingness to use that tool. He did a ton of things wrong too.
But now it’s a problem? We just managed to F3 someone that puts al Baghdadi to shame (in terms of body count, reach, influence) and someone we can PROVE has maimed and killed thousands of Americans...
Why is this even a talking point. Embrace the violence.
When it comes to major war games, the OPFOR almost always "wins," at least in the beginning. Their decision making is extremely short; it's normally a handful of dudes sitting around some computer terminals and an old retiree directing the show. They're typically unencumbered by national-level decision-making, their OPSEC is sound, their comms always seem to work, and whatever half-assed "out of the box" tactic they pull out of their ass seems to work perfectly.
The people playing Red typically don't understand the real-world threat well enough to replicate how they would actually fight. For example, in the pre-Iraq war games, Saddam always ended up gassing the shit out of us. Guess how many of us got gassed when we went all Braveheart all the way across his country? Zero.
Wargames are useful but people make too much out of them when we "lose."
The people playing Red typically don't understand the real-world threat well enough to replicate how they would actually fight. For example, in the pre-Iraq war games, Saddam always ended up gassing the shit out of us. Guess how many of us got gassed when we went all Braveheart all the way across his country? Zero.
Wargames are useful but people make too much out of them when we "lose."
Last edited:
I feel you brother. I was reading through the enemy's order of battle for our last exercise and I was embarrassed as shit that there were a whole bunch of systems on there that I had never heard of before. I went and looked them up and found out they hadn't been fielded yet and only existed in the future (whew).
Worst feeling in the world. Hearing a brand new TLA (three letter acronym) and writing it down in your notebook because you have zero clue what it means. The panic in that moment is real.
President Obama effectively used the best tool we had to take our our enemies and to make an effective deterrent. It's that, or let the problem fester, or risk American lives (and broadening the conflict) to go in on the ground.
The best thing President Trump did with this action, IMO, is that it completely resets his "predictability" meter. There is no way I would have predicted that President Trump would have taken this action, right before the political fight of his life between impeachment and a very contentious re-election. This could have blown up in his face (instead of Soleimani's). I think the Iranians, like me, thought that Trump would simply not do something this big. They thought they knew him. And when you know your enemy...
But now, they realize they DON'T know him. He signaled capability and intent, which equals a very big threat to the Iranians. Now they're going to have to recalculate. He totally seized the initiative and put the Iranians at a distinct disadvantage. It will be interesting to see how this turns out.
Only thing worse is using said acronym in a brief, not knowing what it is, and someone asks you what it means.
Touché. You win- you always do, Baxter.Only thing worse is using said acronym in a brief, not knowing what it is, and someone asks you what it means.
Couldn’t agree with this more. The whole thing (that’s why I didn’t snip it).
@lindy , @R.Caerbannog @Box Et al- get your screencaps ready.
I agree with the president on this move and would like to give him kudos.
Stay strapped or get clapped, everyone. We will bring that shit to your doorstep or convoy or meeting place.
ThunderHorse
Verified Military
Can confirm that. Especially because the OPFOR unit using their simulator tends to have way more trigger time. 1AD had a designated OPFOR Battalion, so they'd be in the SIM on the computers 4-6xYear when the other units might rotate into simulated environment once per year.
Only thing worse is using said acronym in a brief, not knowing what it is, and someone asks you what it means.
To officers, please short title. Thank you.
Looks like the Iraqi parliment "vote" to expel U.S. forces was some sort of face saving measure designed to appease Iran.
Arab Journalist's Translation of Iraqi News Different Than NYT and Wash Po.
CNN's Take
My own thoughts and knowledge on Iraq tell me that even some of the Shiite's in Iraq may want the PMF/PMU's taken out because they became too powerful after getting rid of IS in most places. They then become defacto gangsters in the areas they patrol/control. This is personal opinion based on what I've read about them in the past and the state of things in Iraq right now.
Arab Journalist's Translation of Iraqi News Different Than NYT and Wash Po.
CNN's Take
My own thoughts and knowledge on Iraq tell me that even some of the Shiite's in Iraq may want the PMF/PMU's taken out because they became too powerful after getting rid of IS in most places. They then become defacto gangsters in the areas they patrol/control. This is personal opinion based on what I've read about them in the past and the state of things in Iraq right now.
IIRC that subject came up for discussion some years ago on this forum; that the Iranian-backed PMFs would consolidate position and power once ISIS was eliminated. A Trojan Horse, in effect.
Florida173
SOF Support
I always likened it to order 66. Especially during 2014 when I was forward.
Devildoc
Verified Military
The US Navy did such a game in the 1930s in the Pacific against a fictional force who would attack Pearl Harbor and threaten islands in the western Pacific, using advanced weaponry and tactics. ADM. King said that if not for that exercise the actual war in the Pacific could have lasted twice as long.
I can see that. Once ISIS is gone, the Ayatoola hits the switch. But that green was always kinda reddish, wasn't it?
ISIS was a golden opportunity for Iranian influence in Iraq.
Last edited:
Similar threads
