AHC: Germans & Japanese taught Americans a lesson which they learnt in Iraq & Afghanistan

Fenestella

Banned
We're told that regime change and occupation fuel extremism and radicalization anywhere regardless of ethnicity and ideology, then perhaps remnant German Nazis and Japanese jingoists could teach the Americans a lesson which they later learnt in Iraq and Afghanistan.
 
Regime change and occupation do not necessarily fuel extremism and radicalization.

A segment of mainly Pashtun tribesman in Afghanistan under several names including the Taliban have been trying to take over a long time now and they have the direct support of elements of the Pakistani security apparatus. They were close to total victory before 911 and they have after a beat down regrow their strength with major foreign help to the extent the Afghan govenment would probably last a few months if we pulled out.

With Iraq you overthrew Sunni minority rule and through democracy you had a majority Shia leadership who had to learn the basics of governing from scratch and weren't very good at it to start. Many Sunnis threw in with a charismatic foreign jihadist as a replacement to Saddam and that in turn piggybacked on the existing radicalism among some members of the Iraqi Sunni community and it burned Iraq, but mainly Iraqi Sunnis above all else.

With the second round it was the same group who regrew in Syria in the absence of any foreign military intervention which started reinvading Iraq again and are being pushed out.
 

raharris1973

Gone Fishin'
Donor
Monthly Donor
We're told that regime change and occupation fuel extremism and radicalization anywhere regardless of ethnicity and ideology,

This argument, whether explicitly made, or strongly implied [I think it is implied more often than baldly stated] is not universally applicable.
 
Two things to consider.

1. The US and Soviets were 10^N power DONE with Germany after two world wars within 30 years. While there was some very limited partisan activity, there was nothing like the Werewolves for a reason. There was awfully little sympathy for the civilians who had let that monster in.

2. America had a massive ax to grind with the Japanese, and MacArthur as shogun was by far the best deal they could hope to get.

Iraq and Afghanistan have been very gentle assaults and occupations by the standards of WWII (hell, by any era's standards).
 
We're told that regime change and occupation fuel extremism and radicalization anywhere regardless of ethnicity and ideology, then perhaps remnant German Nazis and Japanese jingoists could teach the Americans a lesson which they later learnt in Iraq and Afghanistan.
Afghanistan was extremist well before American intervention (stoning individuals in soccer stadiums, destroying millennia old artifacts, adhering to an ideology that rejects humanism, technology, and free thought). The Taliban are a minority succored by their neighbors who harbor them as a buffer against neighbors as well as a subtle extremist bent.

Iraq is largely due to a privileged minority losing their rights, disenfranchised and disillusioned, grabbing for whatever opportunity they have for a return to control.

The horrors of Okinawa, Hiroshima, Nagasaki as well as the firebombings of Dresden, etc are not known to these people, nor the horrors of a vengeful occupation.

They see Americans as an invading force, understandable as we are more different than those they have suffered under. But the extremism seen is by a minority determined to win a PR battle rather than a cultural one.

What is seen as local extremism is nothing more than excellent propaganda by outside powers meant to sap the resolve of both natives and foreign forces.
 
We're told that regime change and occupation fuel extremism and radicalization anywhere regardless of ethnicity and ideology, then perhaps remnant German Nazis and Japanese jingoists could teach the Americans a lesson which they later learnt in Iraq and Afghanistan.

Neither Japan nor Germany had the sort of ethno-religious tensions that characterized Iraq and Afghanistan in the 2000s...
 
German Nazis and Japanese jingoists could teach the Americans a lesson which they later learnt in Iraq and Afghanistan.
Did Germany and Japan not depend on imported food to survive post occupation, I don't think resistance would lead to very good things considering the lack of sympathy especially considering what has happened recently to the none US forces (Soviet/Chinese especially) homelands?
 
The horrors of Okinawa, Hiroshima, Nagasaki as well as the firebombings of Dresden, etc are not known to these people, nor the horrors of a vengeful occupation.

They see Americans as an invading force, understandable as we are more different than those they have suffered under. But the extremism seen is by a minority determined to win a PR battle rather than a cultural one.

What is seen as local extremism is nothing more than excellent propaganda by outside powers meant to sap the resolve of both natives and foreign forces.

The Qataris and others using their deep pockets and media outlets did sell the Taliban and AQI/ISIS as local extremism and 'resistance to occupation' to Westerners and Arabs outside Iraq and Afghanistan. This was a very successful campaign for a time as was restricting the coalitions ability to fight using AJ. The first battle of Fallujah was case and point of that.

I think they are somewhat regretting now what they did at least for Iraq given they have an angry Saudi Arabia that they have been playing games with Iran and Iraq is not strong enough in no small part due to their actions to check the Saudi actions though Iraq is trying to be the moderator of the conflict. The Taliban I am not sure, the Qataris still keep open public diplomatic relations with them and clearly want them to win in Afghanistan.

Either way yes the West did not wage a Total War against those in question aiding the Taliban or AQI/ISIS and have taken great pride that they waged war to cause the least death and suffering possible. But, hearts and minds alone is overrated you need a carrot and stick, it's what in the end worked in Iraq twice.

Ike in going into Germany made clear in no uncertain terms there would be extreme measures taken against possible Nazi insurgents. And, when they say ruthless by WW2 context they typically mean not feeding or destroying urban areas. The unsaid carrot was that Ike would push against the German deindustrialization/starvation plans drawn up in Washington.

w332.jpg~original
 
Last edited:
Top