The War in Iraq....The horror.....

[Xorv]

Today I was watching CNN and a journalist was interviewing a soilder, and he said" "what a waste of resources. Our presence here is pretty pointless. Our american infantry is accomplishing about as much as the new iraqi governemnt...NOTHING! If anything, the insurgents are the ones who are the real winners...for now"

Intresting. Here we are, one of the most powerful 1st world countries in the world And we can't fight off a group of insurgents. Even with our high-tech equipment, they're still straining our military with their simple tacts. And how simple it is. If you think about this very hard. You will come to realize that the enemy (insurgents) are fucking brillant. Simple, yes effective. Very effective. If they just picked up a gun and ran toward our marines. They'd be shot without even firing a shot. Thats how we probably thought it would be in march of 2003. Instead of a man, strapped with dynamite. Walking into a huge crowd and killing himself and others. Simple yet effective, very effective when it occurs daily. We're in a tight squeeze here. Retreat, and we leave a safe haven for terrorist. A personal reminder to them of their victory against the supposed superpower of the world.
Stay and we face the continued slaughter of these extreme people. A terror that never seems to end, but only returns with a bigger bang. A place where the unsuspecting parked car can be a weapon.

A new century, a new war.

 

[judas69]

So what is your solution, pulling out? ..or should we stay the course?

 

[SoundMaster]

So what is your solution, pulling out? ..or should we stay the course?

Both are disatrous (if "staying the course" means continuing on alone).

What will probably happen is that the next president will enlist the help of our allies - as was Kerry's plan - by promising them a huge piece of the pie. It has to happen if this is to be successful in the long run. The other option is for America to re-institute the draft which will be political suicide (and would probably spark some rioting), so it's not a viable alternative.

The fact of the matter is that pulling out may well be the single most dangerous thing that can happen. Does the world really need another failed state that's 'goverened' by various factions, or worse, by Islamic extremists?

anyway, the U.S. will never fully leave Iraq - unless another Middle Eastern nation becomes home to our presence there. Interests in that area are too important, obviously. Especially with Iran being capable of disrupting the flow of oil shipping through the Straight of Hormuz.

Rummy's estimate of "a dozen years" was short by a few, in my opinion.

 

[judas69]

It is a hard decision especially when the US appears only at the cusp of resolving this whole thing, if even that.

Pulling out will automatically doom the current administration to failure and give citizens who currently align themselves with the US no choice but to realign thmselves with the insurgents. All soilder deaths previous will thus have been in vain.

Staying the course will send more troops to the grave for no guarantee and little benefit if there even is success to be had somewhere in the future. This all may be good for the Iraqi people, but that price is being paid in US blood.

If the president called me up on the phone and asked me to make the decision, I think I would pull out even this far in and make it an expensive lesson.

 

[Söy]

that's not new at all. it's almost vietnam transferred to iraq, with a few ideaological/religious differences.

 

[derek]

The thing here is that we have interfered and it's plainly obvious to me it was never with the best intentions and certainly has not produced a good outcome.

I don't think the situation will ever be truly resolved. It's being messy, bloody and sickening.

Also I strongly disagree with the dynamic that we are over there helping.

 

[Xorv]

So what is your solution, pulling out? ..or should we stay the course?

Whichever choice we make. It won't end easy. Never. Obviously.

 

[OldScratch]

We are fighting this war, as Sgt. Barnes said in Platoon, "with one hand tied around our b*ls." Whether you agree or disagree with this military action, from a tactical standpoint we(America) just never learn our lesson.
We fight in Iraq like the Feredal Army fought early in the Civil War. The Federals were bigger, better organized, had far greater resources and deeper pockets...and most of all they were in the "right" - just ask 'em! Meanwhile the Confederacy had everything to lose, was hopelessly out manned, outgunned, etc. But they had master tacticians in their leadership - Lee, Jackson, Ewell, Rodes, Forrest, Stewart, etc. The Union had a pack of would- be politicians more interested in scoring points in Washington than crushing the enemy upon the field of battle.
The tide only turned for the Union when they realized they were fighting an enemy who was neither inferior, nor a pack of fanatics, etc. and that their being "right" didn't mean a damned thing in combat.
Russia learned these same lessons when the demonstrably smaller Wehrmacht smashed enormous military divisions with minimal losses and frightening speed. Russia underestimated Germany and paid the price with millions of Russian lives...and ultimately Hitler(thanks in large part his often inept and traitorous intelligence units) learned the same bitter lesson as the war went on.
In modern times, Viet Nam naturally comes to mind and the Russian disaster in Afghanistan paint much the same picture.
Trying to fight wars like we are today, is even more futile than any mentioned above. We CANNOT win a conventional war against an entirely unconventional enemy! No matter how "right" we think we are(the great lberators, spreading "Democracy" and all that). I do think many in the US military fully realize that now...but I sincerely doubt anyone knows quite what to do about it.

 

[Keltoi]

There is no correct answer at this point, just a coin toss to choose which bad decision will have to be made. As much as I want the U.S. out of the Middle East(militarily), the U.S. holds the responsibility for the future of Iraq, whether good or bad. There is really no choice but to see it through to the end, unless the Iraqi government and Baghdad are damaged beyond repair.

 

[Xorv]

I see dark days ahead for this country. very dark days.

 

[Seditious]

I wouldn't say they were 'fuckin brilliant'

if america wanted to they could play invasion of bahgdad part 2 and just kill everything in sight.

they're only having trouble cos they're trying to be really soft about it and not kill any more 'innocent' human shields.

 

[fah-q]

I wouldn't say they were 'fuckin brilliant'

if america wanted to they could play invasion of bahgdad part 2 and just kill everything in sight.

they're only having trouble cos they're trying to be really soft about it and not kill any more 'innocent' human shields.

The increase in media coverage, embedded "journalists" and the internet have made fighting any war difficult. You don't have to agree or disagree with the war to understand that.

 

[SoundMaster]

I disagree that we could "simply end this at will". The fact of the matter is that we're awesome at waging conventional war (ie: witness Gulf War I, war on the Taliban, or the ouster of Hussein's army at the start of Gulf War II). The problem is that this is now a guerilla insurgency, which is nearly impossible to defeat. Recent historical evidence validates this claim (witness Vietnam, Sovs in Afghan).

Think about it: the GOP may be on the verge of losing seats because of the current state of the war. If they could "pull a switch" and rid themselves of the problem, it would have been done already.

 

[judas69]

As a kid I used to build a lot of forts; snow based in winter, wood based in summer.

As a kid, you never built a fort just for the sake of building a fort, you built it to engage in war with the neighbour.

 

[Seditious]

As a kid I used to build a lot of forts; snow based in winter, wood based in summer.

As a kid, you never built a fort just for the sake of building a fort, you built it to engage in war with the neighbour.

lies!! I never had anything but peace in any fort I ever had as a child (and I had like 7 of them)

 

[judas69]

Once we found a bag of playboys in someones fort ..that stopped the war for a little while.

 

[OldScratch]

I wouldn't say they were 'fuckin brilliant'

if america wanted to they could play invasion of bahgdad part 2 and just kill everything in sight.

This was our approach in WW2. Few recall that the much-celebrated D-Day invasion at Normandy alone cost the French some 10,000 civilians! Nevermind the unconscionable toll on German civilans via Allied bombings, etc. Naturally, a great deal is made of Germany's exploits, but the Allies(don't even get me started on our fast-friends the Soviets) have an awful lot of blood on their(our) hands as well...and unlike Lady Macbeth, we lose not a wink of sleep over it.(Greatest Generation??)
Amazing how things are recalled so differently regarding the "good war." We have no stomach for war today - this is clear regardless of whether folks approve or disapprove of the mission.

 

[fah-q]

Didn't we occupy Germany for something like 8 years after we liberated them? There were Nazi holdovers that had to be dealt with there. Back then, the soldiers didn't have to worry about being accused of war crimes by some journalist who has no idea what is going on or how many real dangers are faced.

 

[OldScratch]

Didn't we occupy Germany for something like 8 years after we liberated them? There were Nazi holdovers that had to be dealt with there. Back then, the soldiers didn't have to worry about being accused of war crimes by some journalist who has no idea what is going on or how many real dangers are faced.

Yes, and I suspect we will ultimately have to occupy Iraq(in some respect) for that and more after having 'liberated' them as well. Indeed, the soldiers of WW2 did not have to worry about the war-crimes business...if they were on the 'right' side(the sham trials of Kurt Meyer or Sepp Dietrich come to mind). But as Iraq is a very unpopular war unlike "the big one," they are trying to conduct war under impossible scrutiny. I believe our military is essentially in a terrible pickle - damned if they do, damned if they don't type of thing.

 

[SoundMaster]

Yes, and I suspect we will ultimately have to occupy Iraq(in some respect) for that and more after having 'liberated' them as well. Indeed, the soldiers of WW2 did not have to worry about the war-crimes business...if they were on the 'right' side(the sham trials of Kurt Meyer or Sepp Dietrich come to mind). But as Iraq is a very unpopular war unlike "the big one," they are trying to conduct war under impossible scrutiny. I believe our military is essentially in a terrible pickle - damned if they do, damned if they don't type of thing.

Even if we adopted a WWII type "the hell with popular sentiment" mentality and flexed more muscle, how would it help? The conventional army was destroyed at the onset of the invasion. They're not who we're fighting. It's a guerilla war. And if we employ a rampage of indiscriminate killing, we'll only increase the number of people rushing to join the insurgents.

Again, our experience in Vietnam and the Russian's experience in Afghan more or less prove that this type of guerilla warfare is quite hard - if not impossible - to defeat.

The current state of Iraq has less to do with some reporters than it does with the fact that we're not fighting a conventional army.