Great predictions in military history.

[ShotMagnet]

...I would trust you with big buckets of sunshine any day of the week. As you say though, not everyone is as trustworthy.

Cheers mate! Now, if we could just rustle me up a nuke or two, or a set of launch codes...

 

What is a 'bucket of sunshine', anyway?

 

 

Shot

[Lampshade111]

"American" 21st century (same)

 

The 21st century has only just begun. It may not be another "American century" but it is not going to be a "European century" like some in the EU seem to think.

[Gunguy]

Submarines can and do in training sink ships at will. If they were unleashed on the surface Navy, the surface Navy would be mostly subsurface after awhile. Also, for Infantry, the "Women fight as good as men" theory has never been proven. Sure they can fight, but they do have their limitations. Thats all I have to say. Just wanted to throw my 2 cents in here.....

[JWB]

"This is the biggest fool thing we have ever done. The (atomic)bomb will never go off, and I speak as an expert in explosives."

 

Admiral William Leahy

[shep854]

The other side of the coin, at some time in the early 70s the USAF (it may have been the USN. The braincells are rapidly departing) had a trial with simulated 'armed' Ryan Firebee drones against experienced crews in F4 Phantoms. The firebees won the engagement every time. When the USAF top brass found out about it, they panicked and shut it down. Makes you wonder how wrong Sandys actually was.

 

The USAF also had a program where they flew drone fighters against manned a/c, where the unmanned were able to pull much higher G-forces than the manned. Guess who won...

[Kding]

Didn't just about everybody predict that both the American Civil War and WW I to be over by Christmas??

 

 

Most people say what they want to believe is true, rather than what probably is true.

 

Didnt Lord Kitchener (in 1914) say something akin to "This war will last at least three years, and be won by the last side that can put another million trained men in the field"

[BillB]

Most people say what they want to believe is true, rather than what probably is true.

 

Didnt Lord Kitchener (in 1914) say something akin to "This war will last at least three years, and be won by the last side that can put another million trained men in the field"

...and there starts another thread entitled "Great Predictions in Military History that were proved DEAD RIGHT"...

 

BillB

[Yama]

How about popular notion within the navies in 1930's (including Kriegsmarine), that submarines would not play major role in next naval conflict, owing to development of ASDIC and other countermeasures.

[Chris Werb]

Right, except that in both our occupations of Iraq and Afghanistan, our casualty rates are far lower than what the Sovs took, and would have been quite politically sustainable under their system.

 

As to great predictions, take a look at pretty much any British MOD White Paper.

 

Examples:

 

The interceptor fighter is dead, we only need SAMs now. (BOMARC)

 

I think the US must have bought into the latter one to some extent too as BOMARC was a US system and only deployed by the US and Canuckistan AFAIK I take your point about our having some fairly batty White Papers though, right up to the present day.

[shep854]

Submarines can and do in training sink ships at will. If they were unleashed on the surface Navy, the surface Navy would be mostly subsurface after awhile.

 

What's that bubblehead saying, "There are two kinds of ships; subs and targets"?

 

I have often wondered if Communist moles had a hand in writing those White Papers. They certainly hindered the ability of the UK to defend herself.

[sunday]

What's that bubblehead saying, "There are two kinds of ships; subs and targets"?

 

I have often wondered if Communist moles had a hand in writing those White Papers. They certainly hindered the ability of the UK to defend herself.

 

After the publishing of The Venona Secrets, I wouldn't be very surprised. The whole affair of the demise of TSR.2 stinks to high heaven.

[BP]

C'mon, the all-time TankNet favorite:

 

"They couldn't hit an elephant at this dist. . . "

- General John Sedwick, Spotsylvania Court House

[Guest aevans]

How about popular notion within the navies in 1930's (including Kriegsmarine), that submarines would not play major role in next naval conflict, owing to development of ASDIC and other countermeasures.

 

They were pretty much right, as far as navies go. Commerce raiding was a secondary mission that got promoted to primary -- except for the Japanese -- when the use of subs in fleet operations didn't work out so well.

[BillB]

What's that bubblehead saying, "There are two kinds of ships; subs and targets"?

 

I have often wondered if Communist moles had a hand in writing those White Papers. They certainly hindered the ability of the UK to defend herself.

Possible but prolly not. The assorted incompetents that have made up much of HM Governments for the last century or so have never really needed much external input to undermine the ability of the UK to defend herself. And the worst damage has arguably been done in the last twenty odd years, and thus since the fall of the Iron Curtain...

 

BillB

[harryRIEDL]

Is it too late to burn Malcolm Rifkind in a Wicker man? A fair percentage of the problems we have today can be traced back to Options for Change.

dose this mean we can argue which party been best and worst for defense of the realm because its tricky as it seems to be dependent on leader rather than the party

[Lampshade111]

I hope the prediction that carrier battle groups will be worthless in the face of hordes of attack aircraft with cruise missiles turns out to be wrong.

[Archie Pellagio]

Does anyone know when the Soviet invasion of Afghanistan began to unravel?

Was it from the beginning?

 

The mission changed, it was initially a kick in the door, securely install new puppets and get out in less than 18 months.

It slowly started to unravel.

 

Not entirely unlike the NATO mission in Afgh today, it was initially centred on major urban centres but later spread to control the terrorists and gradually got bogged down.

 

As for casualties, while overall true, if the sovs had inteceptor vests and all the tech avaliable today they would be a lot lower too.

[thekirk]

Interceptor vests and some slight inkling of field sanitation...

 

I read a Soviet-sourced book about the Afghanistan campaign. I believe it was translated by the US military CA. 1999. In it, there was a bit written by a Soviet physician, who blithely dropped the fact that some ungodly number of Soviet troops had been hospitalized for truly amazing things, like typhus and other diseases. Mostly related to abysmal field sanitation levels.

 

At the end of the piece, he stated that there had been something like 740,000 Russian soldiers deployed to Afghanistan. Of that number, 690,000 had required "significant periods of hospitalization for non-battle illness and injuries...". The detailed list of illnesses included things that western armies only see in history books. Figures quoted from memory, and may not be accurate.

 

I wasn't really surprised to read of Russian soldiers dying of thirst in sealed railway cars on the way to Chechnya. The Russians have major issues with providing for their soldiers, for some reason. I don't know if it's cultural, or a relic of the communists, but things I heard from a former Russian soldier now serving in the US Army amazed me. I knew it was bad, but hearing it first-hand? Wow.

 

If I had been guilty of what their leadership did, on a routine basis, I'd have wound up Leavenworth for several centuries. The phrase "dereliction of duties" doesn't even begin to do the situations he described justice. He was continually shocked that anyone, from team leader up to brigade commander gave a damn about taking care of troops, let alone actually did something. This Russian kid truly had some horror stories to pass on. He also had the opinion that if the living standard of the US Army had become well-known in Russia, our biggest problem would have been in keeping the Russians from deserting to us. Provided, of course, that we weren't invading the Rodina, that is...

Edited March 24, 2008 by thekirk

[Sardaukar]

I know this great prediction was proven wrong...

 

They couldn't hit an elephant at this distance.

 

These were among the final words of General John Sedgwick, Union Commander in the U.S. Civil War, who was hit by sniper fire a few minutes after saying them, at the battle of Spotsylvania, on May 9, 1864.

[Jim Martin]

I think the US must have bought into the latter one to some extent too as BOMARC was a US system and only deployed by the US and Canuckistan AFAIK I take your point about our having some fairly batty White Papers though, right up to the present day.

 

 

Perhaps my own gray cells are deteriorating, but I thought the WP in question specifically cited BOMARC as an effective alternative to manned interceptors. Perhaps another "almost buy" of the MoD?

[KingSargent]

"WE ARE READY, VERY READY, DOWN TO THE LAST GAITER BUTTON."

 

Edmund Laboeuf French Miister of War, July 14, 1870.

[Rubberneck]

If I had a dollar for every time I heard this phrase from Sep 10, 2001 and before, I could have retired a wealthy man:

 

"We're never going to need the National Guard Brigades and Divisions. It's a waste of resources."

[Matt L.]

[Paul in Qatar]

Damn he has aged.

 

Besides that one wasn't the President's fault. The troops made the sign and hung it. It was the sailor's fault you see. Not the President's fault. Not a bit. No sirree.

[KingSargent]

Damn he has aged.

 

Besides that one wasn't the President's fault. The troops made the sign and hung it. It was the sailor's fault you see. Not the President's fault. Not a bit. No sirree.

Well, the sailors HAD accomplished their mission. The Prez was just there to welcome them home.