Quote:
Originally Posted by Raellus
One could say many of the same things of the U.S.-led coalition's two "wars" against Iraq (i.e. the Iraqi army plainly sucked and was pounded by numerically superior forces at the points of attack).
One of the things that makes T2K so cool is the whole "what if?" of what a major war between NATO and the WTO would look like. One simply can't predict the outcome of WWIII based on the respective combatants' performance in proxy wars against third-rate powers (or guerrilla wars).
|
Very true: And to be fair, the terrain was very much on the Georgians side. The only point(s) in favor of the US invasion of Iraq on this subject is that while all organized resistance to the invasion was pretty much put down fast and hard (The size of Iraq should be taken in account on how long it took) our biggest, most massive, most unforgivable goof was Rummy's decision to override the Local Commander and totally disband the Iraqi Army. If it was left in place, all those soldiers who wound up arming, or even joining, the resistance would not have happened to the same degree. If for no other reason that staying in the Iraqi Army bases meant that the Allies would provide food and pay. Which, hindsight being what it is, would probably been the cheaper option of the two - in every measurable way.