Bargain Hunter(s) Read This

General topics related to Living in Chile
Post Reply
User avatar
admin
Site Admin
Posts: 22670
Joined: Sat Aug 26, 2006 11:02 pm
Location: Frutillar, Chile
Contact:

Re: Bargain Hunter(s) Read This

Post by admin » Fri Jun 16, 2017 12:05 pm

The other day, I went to go start a fire. My wife had tossed a copy of the "Bolivia vs. Chile" international law suit in to the basket of papers for starting a fire. I had a good chuckle about that as I started the fire with it. It burned really well due to all the hot air it contained. If someone is going to start trouble, it will be Bolivia; but, they are not going to start too much trouble as they need Chile to stay in power. Annoying law suits, a little poking at the boarder guards, and so on.

If Bolivia ever got it's shit together, Chile would probably provide a relatively useful access to the ocean to allow them to grow economically. right now they are just a basket case, due to their own internal b.s.

The Venezuela I think would be a proper target for the U.S., if they started endangering Colombia or Panama. For the moment, the Venezuelan government is doing more damage to their own country than any foreign military invasion would likely do. What you going to do, bomb the empty stores? crash the economy? Shutdown their oil industry and shoot more holes in their leaky pipes? All an invader would be doing is buying the fix it bill for a country someone else destroyed already.
Spencer Global Chile: Legal, relocation, and Investment assistance in Chile.
For more information visit: https://www.spencerglobal.com

From USA and outside Chile dial 1-917-727-5985 (U.S.), in Chile dial 65 2 42 1024 or by cell 747 97974.

User avatar
nwdiver
Rank: Chile Forum Citizen
Posts: 3130
Joined: Tue Mar 17, 2009 8:45 pm
Location: Vancouver, BC and Chile where ever it's Summer
Contact:

Re: Bargain Hunter(s) Read This

Post by nwdiver » Fri Jun 16, 2017 1:25 pm

Re: Venezuela it's very interesting Russia has even lost interest after the big arms deals of 7-8 years ago, their screwy oil industry types left after a couple of years of a 10 year contract. When the Russian oligarchs can't make a buck you know it's f@cked........
It's all about the wine.

User avatar
nwdiver
Rank: Chile Forum Citizen
Posts: 3130
Joined: Tue Mar 17, 2009 8:45 pm
Location: Vancouver, BC and Chile where ever it's Summer
Contact:

Re: Bargain Hunter(s) Read This

Post by nwdiver » Fri Jun 16, 2017 1:30 pm

I don't see any SA conflicts in the future. Colombia (with 2 o, I live part time in the one with a u) may have an issue with refugees from Venezuela but that's about the extent of any conflict........
It's all about the wine.

User avatar
El Chupacabra
Rank: Chile Forum Citizen
Posts: 463
Joined: Wed Apr 27, 2011 12:02 am
Location: Earth (most of the time)

Re: Bargain Hunter(s) Read This

Post by El Chupacabra » Fri Jun 16, 2017 2:54 pm

admin wrote:
Julito wrote:Seems I went off half cocked. I did some research. They're doing a wide variety of training for multiple scenarios, including integrated training with other nations with long established institutional memories of actual combat. So perhaps that Prussian "top down" command system has dissipated to some degree. They're also better equipped than I thought.
I have heard passing rumors of Chilean soldiers doing "contract" work in the middle east. They also deployed the military to Haiti after the earthquake there, and are only now starting to wrap-up that humanitarian deployment. Of course, the Chilean military never did cut ties to the "school of the Americas" or whatever they call themselves today.
It's only retired soldiers (mostly commandos) that do contract work overseas. I helped organize and recruit back in 2006 when Blackwater was hiring after the gulf war. No active duty personnel was or is ever hired.

In addition, the joint training with other nations is very common among militarizes around the world. It does not come close to real combat (even if it's a live fire exercise). Something about real bullets aimed at you combined with the knowledge that someone else is actively trying to kill you changes the dynamics of a persons thinking, stress levels and reactions that no live fire drill can ever duplicate. A lot of people crack under the pressure, and you never really know how well trained or reliable a soldier will be until tested in real combat. The good news to that is any military Chile will ever be engaged in combat with will lac the combat experience as well, so there shouldn't be much to worry about.
Living the life!

User avatar
admin
Site Admin
Posts: 22670
Joined: Sat Aug 26, 2006 11:02 pm
Location: Frutillar, Chile
Contact:

Re: Bargain Hunter(s) Read This

Post by admin » Sat Jun 17, 2017 10:22 am

yea, sorry, I meant x-chilean soldiers, not that the Chilean government was sending them officially.

I am sure any real war, there would be (hopefully) a rapid number of retirements and whole lot of promotions from below.

The U.S. goes through that every time a new shooting war breaks out. Like all navy spending the first year or so running away from the Japanese in WWII, until they started replacing officers with some better talent; or, I once seen this crazy stat from WWII that if a fighter pilot survived their first engagement, they had something like a 80% or 90% chance of surviving the war. However, something like only 1 in 10 survived their first engagement.

But, that is also what sort of bothers me about the political chants about the American military being the most experienced right now. I think the politicians, and the Pentagon at least to some degree, are over estimating just how experienced the soldiers on the ground are after 16+ years of war.

I once had friend that was on the front lines of the first gulf war, army I believe. His commander told him, "if you see an enemy with your own eyes during this entire war, something has gone really wrong".

People got promoted up the ranks of the U.S. military, based on their ability in that war to stand around in the dessert. Technically, they had seen "combat", even though most had never picked-up gun, or heard a shot fired outside the range.

For example, I am watching several documentaries recently where they are interviewing a bunch of low level army ranger platoons. Guys are telling these stories about a particular battle, and they are on like their 3rd or 4th deployment. some as many as 6th deployment, to Afghanistan and Iraq. One of them let slip that durring a particular ambush one of their guys died, and that was the first time they ever seen anyone of their friends get killed. Obviously, like patton said, getting killed is not the point of war; but, due to the type of high-tech, remote control, low level insurgent war that the U.S. military has been fighting for the last 16 years, I am not certain those skills are going to translate well in to say a war with N. Korea, China, etc. The U.S. military has been sort of rolling drunks or fighting straw-man. That is not to put down the guys actually risking their life, the guys that died, but as an evaluation of the overall organization's readiness status they claim.

Other thing I found disturbing was that these vets, after all those deployments, were still spewing propaganda bullshit out of a basic training handbook. The interviews with the Marines and SEALS were a good bit better, and of course all the standard jokes about the Army vs. Marines probably apply; but, if you compare those sort of interviews of the vets of this war on 'whatever the hell it is called these days' vs. say interviews with Vietnam vets, korea, wwII, and the tone is very, very different than what these guys were spewing. This is in spite of the fact it seems that American soliders are seeing more days in combat zones by a big number than the former wars, but seem to actually be engaging, directly in combat, less. I think it all hinges on what is considered "combat". Sitting around the base playing video games for most of deployment, probably should not count as "combat experience" in spite of all the practice they are getting in a first person shooter game. I am sure we could go on with this, but I think you get my point about combat experience here, and what impact it really has in this day and age.

I am not sure the Chilean military is any better or worse off, simply for lack of action. Obviously better equipment and better training helps, but just on a "what have you done lately" sort of comparison, a lot of the world's militaries, even ones actively and regularly engaging in conflict, are not able to transfer that experience over to the next one. Thus, the famous saying, 'we are always fighting the last war', is very true. Hopefully, the chileans don't try to fight the war of the pacific from 1879, if they ever end up in a war. Hopefully, we never find out.
Spencer Global Chile: Legal, relocation, and Investment assistance in Chile.
For more information visit: https://www.spencerglobal.com

From USA and outside Chile dial 1-917-727-5985 (U.S.), in Chile dial 65 2 42 1024 or by cell 747 97974.

Julito
Rank: Chile Forum Citizen
Posts: 286
Joined: Sun Apr 19, 2015 5:39 pm
Location: Villarrica

Re: Bargain Hunter(s) Read This

Post by Julito » Sat Jun 17, 2017 6:41 pm

It takes the logistical support of about 10 back down the line to keep one up at the sharp end of things so the vast majority in theatre never experience actual combat, though a minority might witness it from afar.
As to the fighting ability of untested troops it comes down to training, confidence in their equipment, leadership and motivation. If all those bases are properly covered they'll perform well.

thisisreallycomplicated
Rank: Chile Forum Citizen
Posts: 2262
Joined: Sun Aug 07, 2011 6:25 pm
Location: Coquimbo

Re: Bargain Hunter(s) Read This

Post by thisisreallycomplicated » Sat Jun 17, 2017 7:40 pm

"Mysterious ship crash off Japan leaves 7 US sailors missing"
http://hosted.ap.org/dynamic/stories/A/ ... 7-09-21-07

How vulnerable is the US navy, if they can't dodge a 730 foot freighter, that's slower than my old car? And I'm assuming the freighter wasn't trying to hit them.
“Now it’s conspiracy – they’ve made that something that should not even be entertained for a minute, that powerful people might get together and have a plan. Doesn’t happen, you’re a kook, you’re a conspiracy buff!” – George Carlin

Andres
Rank: Chile Forum Citizen
Posts: 2706
Joined: Mon May 30, 2011 3:09 am
Location: Ex Chile; returned to Oz

Re: Bargain Hunter(s) Read This

Post by Andres » Sat Jun 17, 2017 7:54 pm

admin wrote:People got promoted up the ranks of the U.S. military, based on their ability in that war to stand around in the dessert. Technically, they had seen "combat", even though most had never picked-up gun, or heard a shot fired outside the range.
Another not-uncommon theme is an out-of-theatre officer flying into a "war zone" on a military transport or passenger aircraft, then flying out when it leaves after tens-of-minutes or a few hours on-the-ground, so they can get the medal associated with that war zone, battle or war.
Chile: My expectations are low. Very low.
I accept chaos. I'm not sure whether it accepts me.

Andres
Rank: Chile Forum Citizen
Posts: 2706
Joined: Mon May 30, 2011 3:09 am
Location: Ex Chile; returned to Oz

Re: Bargain Hunter(s) Read This

Post by Andres » Sat Jun 17, 2017 8:23 pm

admin wrote:Sitting around the base playing video games for most of deployment, probably should not count as "combat experience" in spite of all the practice they are getting in a first person shooter game. I am sure we could go on with this, but I think you get my point about combat experience here, and what impact it really has in this day and age.
And, as a side note, people are sitting around a base in Nevada "playing" a video game of killing people on the other side of the world.
That too is called "combat", and they are getting "combat stress".

One advantage of the good-old-days was that, if a king wanted to go to war, he usually had to be out there on the front lines with his troops.
I think that is an admirable policy. Can you imagine George W, O'bomber, Trump, John Howard, Malcolm Turnbull or Tony Blair invading countries if THEY had to be out there doing patrols where they could get their asses shot off?
Chile: My expectations are low. Very low.
I accept chaos. I'm not sure whether it accepts me.

Andres
Rank: Chile Forum Citizen
Posts: 2706
Joined: Mon May 30, 2011 3:09 am
Location: Ex Chile; returned to Oz

Re: Bargain Hunter(s) Read This

Post by Andres » Sun Jun 18, 2017 5:36 am

While what you say is true (about Rule 5, keeping a lookout), what is more important is the relative movement of the two vessels, which defines right-of-way when both vessels are of "equal ranking" (they are both "motor-driven vessels"):

Was one of the vessels overtaking the other? (Coming up from >112.5° from straight ahead).
If it was, the vessel overtaking should give right-of-way. (Rule 13, COLREGS)

Or, if neither was overtaking the other, who was on whom's starboard bow? A vessel, must give right-of-way to a vessel on its starboard bow (<112.5° from the bow). (Rule 15, COLREGS)
Based upon the tanker's port bow having minor damage, and the US Navy ship having starboard side damage, the US Navy ship would be in the wrong if it was not being overtaken.

Bottom line: If the tanker was overtaking the US Navy ship, it was at fault. If it was not, the US Navy ship was at fault.

But, even if the tanker is legally at fault, the US Navy ship is a lot more "nimble" (manoeuverable and able to change its speed more easily) than a large tanker . . . and is supposed to have a lot more "situational awareness" than a commercial vessel, just for their own survival. They should have had their spit together enough to avoid the collision.

And, even if you have legal right-of-way (at sea or on the road), why mess with a vessel (or vehicle) MANY times your mass?
Chile: My expectations are low. Very low.
I accept chaos. I'm not sure whether it accepts me.

Andres
Rank: Chile Forum Citizen
Posts: 2706
Joined: Mon May 30, 2011 3:09 am
Location: Ex Chile; returned to Oz

Re: Bargain Hunter(s) Read This

Post by Andres » Mon Jun 19, 2017 2:37 am

bert.douglas wrote:I don't think it matters who had the "right of way" or who is technically "at fault".
This was in the open sea.
If your ship gets smashed up, then it is your fault. Period.
Opinion: I think, regardless of the legal/fault outcome, the US Navy captain will never command a ship again.
I think the tanker skipper will get off more lightly . . . and might even be considered "a victim".
Chile: My expectations are low. Very low.
I accept chaos. I'm not sure whether it accepts me.

User avatar
nwdiver
Rank: Chile Forum Citizen
Posts: 3130
Joined: Tue Mar 17, 2009 8:45 pm
Location: Vancouver, BC and Chile where ever it's Summer
Contact:

Re: Bargain Hunter(s) Read This

Post by nwdiver » Mon Jun 19, 2017 3:46 am

They should have noticed each other 50 miles apart and made an agreement as to their actions, the "rules of the road" are for insurance companies to appoint fault, in this case the Navy ship should be very embarrassed, that other vessel could have been hostile............and it got that close, you're right the bridge crew of the USN ship won't be able to run a vessel on a small lake for pay..........
It's all about the wine.

Post Reply