Originally Posted by
piran
vecvechookattack - what a stupid and ignorant thing to write.
VV actually has a point, a subtle one however. Servicemen are motivated by careers; contractors by money. The motivations are different and flexibility is variable.
That august organisation that even after 8 years in Afghanistan has made so little progress and was so badly prepared that it depends on huge modernisation programmes via UORs.
What evidence is there to show that the Army was so badly prepared? With Defence spending so tight the Army, and the others, have to live by the day. If there is a problem it lies with procurement and production which in asymetric warfare is esentially a slow, reactive, beast against a non-technological nimble adversary. One is risk averse and the other is fighting a guerilla camaign.
And can only think of one war as being "the" war thus taking all the wrong lessons for the future.
The question is how far off is the future? During WW2, how far did we prepare for WW3? The USA was well ahead of us but even there they fought the war they were fighting and not the next one that they might have had to fight.
Worst of all is the Army's total lack of understanding air power.
Evidence?