I think their point is that it doesn't really matter how competent the lower levels of the command structure are if the ones at the very top are bumbling fools unwilling to listen.

> Have we already forgotten what happened to Maduro? What other country in the history of the world could pull something like that off?

Venezuela was a raid, not a full on war. And it was so lopsided it was like putting Michael Jordan against a 10-year-old and based on that performance determining that Jordan is the GOAT. It demonstrated that against a remarkably unprepared and unready opponent the US can do well, which tells you nothing about the US's capabilities in actual warfare against a peer, near peer, or just damned determined opponents.

> Russia tried at Hostomel, didn't go so well.

That was not a comparable action to the Maduro raid. The raid was an in-and-out operation, with no need to control any territory for a significant period. Hostomel was a battle over control of territory.

It's not a tactical failure of the US; it's a strategic one. The US operates a tremendously powerful military, but that doesn't change the fact that the war with Iran was a tremendous strategic blunder. "Moronic" is a pretty fair characterization.

You think the US has shown itself as to be extremely competent in the Iran war? If you were talking about Iraq, that was completely different leadership.

Ahhh. The Maduro operation. You remember a soldier from Maduro's guard saying they were brought to their knees by a wonder weapon.

Shame the wonder weapon didn't surface in Ukraine nor in Iran nor in Yemen where it was desperately needed.

But we hear about the wonder weapon and how wonderful it was on TV. Must be really true :).

> As far as I can see, there are only three proven militaries in the world, the US, Israel and Ukraine

What in your view makes these ones proven and other ones not proven?

Desert Storm was 35 years ago. Almost everyone who fought in it is out of service or dead.

Iraqi invasion was 23 years ago. Again, almost everyone who was part of the initial invasion is out of service. I wouldn't call the occupation of either Afghanistan or Iraq "extremely competent." More like the exact opposite.

Maduro operation wasn’t a war my good man and the other two you reference were 20 and 30 years ago.

Regarding Iraq, please Google “Dick Cheney 1994” he predicted exactly what happened in 2003.

Extremely competent military expert: "Sir, we should hold back up strikes to preserve the stockpile of valuable high-precision missiles"

Someone higher up the chain of command: "Fire the missiles, or I'll replace you with someone who will"

Military competence has nothing to do with running low on munitions after months of war. There are four ways to address the issue: have larger stockpiles before the war, ramp up production during the war, end the war, or don't go to war in the first place. None of those can be done by the military. It's all up to the civilian leadership, and the current civilian leadership is catastrophically incompetent. The current commander in chief is a "fucking moron," to quote his former Secretary of State.

(Am an American, don't know if it matters that I preface with this)

The US military is quite powerful.

Donald Trump is a moron.

Pete Hegseth is also a moron whose only qualification is that he looks like what the moron Donald Trump imagines someone playing his role would look like in the movies/TV.