That Time A Marine General Led A Fictional Iran Against The US military – And Won

Submitted by: daegog 7 months ago in News & Politics


In 2002, the U.S. military tapped Lt. Gen. Paul Van Riper to lead the red opposing forces of the most expensive, expansive military exercise in history. He was put in command of an inferior Middle Eastern-inspired military force. His mission was to go against the full might of the American armed forces. In the first two days, he sank an entire carrier battle group.

Put the General under full military guard, we cannot let the Iranians or anyone else kidnap him.
There are 30 comments:
Male 905
I think I have read about this in one of Michael Shermer's books
0
Reply
Male 905
fuad119 Correction.. it was Malcolm Gladwell's Blink
0
Reply
Male 18,342
I really love stories like this. Warfare has changed since the Soviet era. You'd have thought the US military would have figured out asymmetrical warfare by now because of all their experience of late.

There are people you can't defeat. The Iraqis came back as ISIL, the Afghans rolled over then they essentially reelected the Taleban. The Hmong will make cannons with guano. The Kurds will field teen girls just to psyche you out. Palestinians will breed faster than they can be killed. Even the French, who you love to diss 60 years later had an effective resistance and returned to Normandy as the Free French.

I know we all think Iran will be like Iraq, but I am curious to see how it will work out and what the aftermath will look like.
-1
Reply
828
Even the French, who you love to diss 60 years later had an effective resistance and returned to Normandy as the Free French.

The WWII-era French really isn't the French military you should be lionising. Slow, ineffective, with obsolete tactics. Propped up by their allies as the Free French (understandable, but it's not like they were hardcore). Even the French Resistance was so splintered that they allies got concerned about supplying arms to the various groups, worried that they'd all turn on each other after liberation.

The French of WWI mutinied because "we're not afraid to die, but we're tired of dying for nothing - lead us properly". Whereas the French of WWII couldn't even acknowledge the Allies in the speech given in the recovery of Paris.

France has a long and glorious military history and record, but the French of WWII were a poor military - that same military is the one that subsequently lost to Vietnamese insurgents, and created the cavalcade that was decolonialism (overall a good thing, but still telling that that's where it started).
0
Reply
Male 939
Draculya this is actuslly Irans military strategy and capability. They have little ships designed to swarm and destroy. Whats going to win a £12 billion warship or 1000 £10,000 ships rigged to blow on contact. They know anyome invads they are destroying the oil shipping lanes and causing problems in the gulf. 
0
Reply
Male 7,525
jayme21 God help us if they can control those little bomb boats remotely like drones and we cannot jam the signals.

Wouldn't need to be a full boat either, just an engine and a platform for the explosive.
0
Reply
Male 122
lucky for the U.S. is the Iranian military is lead by Iranians.
0
Reply
Male 46,107
The only reason to wear that top is so people look at her tits.

And then bitch she's being objectified.
-2
Reply
Male 10,234
Gerry1of1 The only reason to wear that top is so people look at her tits

Has to have SOMEthing to detract from her face.
1
Reply
Male 7,525
Gerry1of1 So when you are walking around with your assless chaps and people wink at you, do you get offended?
-1
Reply
Male 46,107
daegog First, I don't own assless chaps.   Crotchless yes.
I would only be offended if I put my goods on display and no one noticed.
0
Reply
Male 1,124
Well it was Bush's reign so of course. 
-2
Reply
Male 580
THIS is why you run such simulations
2
Reply
Male 7,525
I dunno, should we comment hostilities against Iran and Lose and entire Naval Carrier Battle Group, it would be the single largest naval loss in US history.

I think nukes would become a prime consideration at that point.
0
Reply
Male 46,107
daegog   Except for Pearl Harbor when we lost the Pacific Fleet.
-1
Reply
Male 7,525
Gerry1of1 That was a sneak attack and not that big of a deal (militarily, not publicly) , they didn't target the repair facilities and the carriers just HAPPENED to not be there.

They sank battle ships and cruisers and by 1941, Carriers were king.

If WE attacked someone and lost a naval carrier group, that would be a different scale of fuckedupness. 
1
Reply
Female 6,822
BFD, We war-gamers, especially those of us who served do this ALLLL the time.  From civil wars to world wars, its great fun to theorize the outcomes, especially if you're going at it as a tactician rather than a strategist.
0
Reply
Male 6,503
melcervini The big deal is that the US side of the exercise had to rig the game halfway through so they would win. Shouldn't they have changed their strategy instead, like in the real world? That kind of arrogance and inability to admit they were wrong is what gets our brave men and women killed.
1
Reply
828
markust The US routinely lose these wargames to other countries. However, when push comes to shove, the one thing the US do well is engagement - no-one can beat them because they just simply out-size everyone. There's only a few countries that can possibly hope to go toe-to-toe with the US on attrition, and they don't have the technical capabilities to match.
0
Reply
Female 6,822
markust That's why you keep playing "Postmortems".  You so much as slack on a couple of platoon placements and it could cost you dearly/turn the tides.
0
Reply
Male 6,503
melcervini I totally understand that they would have done as many post mortems as needed to figure out why they were loosing. So am I only getting one side of the story here? Did they cut off some of the "enemies" capabilities mid war so they would have to use a different technique so they could find more vulnerabilities and strengths? I think I just answered my own question.
0
Reply
Female 6,822
0
Reply
Male 403
0
Reply
Male 18,342
I don't know enough about Iran, but North Korea have spent the last several generations being cunning and planning for your tech.

They will die to the last man woman and child. They are far more indoctrinated than even the Germans and Japanese during WWII. The Germans fielded kids. The Japanese civilians killed their own babies rather than betray their hiding places.

You will have to consider even preteens as enemy hostiles because they will try to kill you. Even if the body armor saves you, there's going to be a sky high veteran suicide rate.
0
Reply
Male 6,503
Funny how the conservative media in 2002 had no problem with the most expensive military exercise in US history yet freaked the shit out when the military under Obama ran training exercises in Texas, saying Obama was planning to put Texas under martial law. The Governor even sent the Texas State Guard to monitor the exercise.
1
Reply
Male 1,588
I've said it often and I'll say it again, as far as jobs go, nothing trumps experience
0
Reply
Male 9,631
Oh, he was impressive ( although he may have breeched the laws of physics a couple of times ) but they shut him down to make sure they got the win.
0
Reply
Male 1,867
Luck favors the bold!
0
Reply
Male 2,018
Shoot the messenger, ignore the message.
1
Reply
Male 2,345
punko That's why people take painkillers.
1
Reply