Consequences of a failure in Iraq

[geoguy]

"No, because if only ONE person was left, they would still attack and CNN would report it like it matters."

 

Your point? You are proving that it is NOT possible to win such a war in the 21st century with the eyes of the world focused on activity. Torture at Abu Graib and the killing of civilians does not go unnoticed. CNN, BBC, the press, etc. existed BEFORE the invasion. BEFORE the lies for going into Iraq. TV cameras recorded 'Mission Accomplished'....TV cameras record all the 'great progress' statements of Rumsfeld.

 

What part of the equation wasn't there before the invasion? The war was lost from the beginning. Bush played into the hands of the Islamic nutbars. The crazies play the USA like a fish on the line. What was the 'great mystery' that the USA didn't GET before it invaded? What was unknown about Iraq....unknown about the press...unknown about the american public's distate for protracted guerilla warfare...unknown about the world's potential reaction against the USA?

 

Ignore reality and then act 'surprised' when Iraq becomes Iraqinam. The cards were all laid out on the table face up and one of them was your:

 

""No, because if only ONE person was left, they would still attack and CNN would report it like it matters."

 

Instead the USA had a temper tantrum and went through the Freedom Fries episode.

[foodchain]

There is a really sharp divide it seems, or moderate grounds in regards to Iraq seem to be hard to find. All I know is its been four years of what I would really call nothing more then the same situation. Now people say stay the course or what not, that happens to be the blank mantra along with support the troops...

 

Well, all I know is no one knows when the war will end, stay the course in all reality is a who knows in regards to time. So lets look at it this way then. IF the U.S presence is not enough to break this stalemate what’s going to happen to the common public of Iraq in another four years, how about another four after that, because besides using a magic eight ball I don’t know of anyone of some prestige on the situation that has spoken about it and had those words match reality.

 

I know I don’t support another four years of status quo, and along with that how many times did the current big wigs say the insurgency was in its last through, meanwhile the military was calling the insurgency amorphous, or code for lacking any real detail.

 

Personally, its a blank check of human life all around to keep this war going. Listen to all the experts, and then compare those words to the reality on the ground in a chronological format, there is no experts and its all basically a large pile of manure. Shinseki knew that occupation was a body operation, he wanted over 400,000 personal for this, and I imagine if we had that and a more clear plan besides that we will be greeted as heroes and liberators that the war would be different, but now its simply just studying kinetics of sorts.

[ParanoiA]

Instead the USA had a temper tantrum and went through the Freedom Fries episode.

 

Uh...who's the throwing the temper tantrum here?

 

You responded to one statement with two paragraphs of strawmen. Two paragraphs of crap that has nothing to do with the statement.

 

And my point still stands. The war is won. The occupation is messy, costly, and will never be prestine. We must leave before any chance of civilized society can flourish. They hate us. Just like we hated occupiers here in the US so many moons ago. They will never stop retaliating. But they won't get their country back either - that's the part you seem to be ignoring - wishing wasn't true. And I don't understand why.

 

Why does it matter whether or not we're winning anyway? It's irrelevant as to what needs to be done. We need to leave with a formidable Iraqi force in place. If we're losing, we need to do that. If we're winning, we need to do that.

 

I'm just not going to pretend, like the left wing business media here in the US, like we're on our heels. That's silly. Critical thinking is in much needed doses in this thread. I realize your passion against this war, but that doesn't mean we get to chuck reality because it doesn't compliment your agenda.

 

Your point? You are proving that it is NOT possible to win such a war in the 21st century with the eyes of the world focused on activity.

 

The point is you can't gauge whether we're winning or losing based on whether or not the enemy is still attacking you. If that's true then they're losing because we're still attacking them. So who's losing here? Depends on which agenda you're pushing huh?

 

Somebody is always going to strap on a bomb, or shoot up some place and that's no more indicative of "losing the war" anymore than it is "losing our country" when some nutcase does it here.

[ParanoiA]

I know I don’t support another four years of status quo, and along with that how many times did the current big wigs say the insurgency was in its last through, meanwhile the military was calling the insurgency amorphous, or code for lacking any real detail.

 

Yeah, the politics on both sides have been despicable. I think politics looks its worse at wartime. It's the most pathetic reason for people to have to die.

[geoguy]

Uh...who's the throwing the temper tantrum here?

 

You responded to one statement with two paragraphs of strawmen. Two paragraphs of crap that has nothing to do with the statement.

 

And my point still stands. The war is won. The occupation is messy, costly, and will never be prestine. We must leave before any chance of civilized society can flourish. They hate us. Just like we hated occupiers here in the US so many moons ago. They will never stop retaliating. But they won't get their country back either - that's the part you seem to be ignoring - wishing wasn't true. And I don't understand why.

 

Why does it matter whether or not we're winning anyway? It's irrelevant as to what needs to be done. We need to leave with a formidable Iraqi force in place. If we're losing, we need to do that. If we're winning, we need to do that.

 

I'm just not going to pretend, like the left wing business media here in the US, like we're on our heels. That's silly. Critical thinking is in much needed doses in this thread. I realize your passion against this war, but that doesn't mean we get to chuck reality because it doesn't compliment your agenda.

 

 

 

The point is you can't gauge whether we're winning or losing based on whether or not the enemy is still attacking you. If that's true then they're losing because we're still attacking them. So who's losing here? Depends on which agenda you're pushing huh?

 

Somebody is always going to strap on a bomb, or shoot up some place and that's no more indicative of "losing the war" anymore than it is "losing our country" when some nutcase does it here.

 

Odd. the warmongers claim there is a 'mission' and that there is an 'enemy'. The mission is not achieved...the enemy is not defeated. the war is lost. Why else would the warmongers insist on a 'surge' and not bring the troops back to the USA? It's amusing how some americans when speaking of the Iraq defeat, as in Vietnam, do anything to embrace a polyanish language to avoid the idea that the USA LOST the war.

 

The world is a safer place now that the USA has been slapped on the bottom. The most dangerous nation, with a moron in control, has been humiliated and won't be lying and fudging evidence any time soon to pursue the next target in the fight of 'good vs evil'.

[ParanoiA]

Odd. the warmongers claim there is a 'mission' and that there is an 'enemy'.

 

Why are you replying to me about what warmongers claim? Maybe you shouldn't listen to them huh?

 

Why else would the warmongers insist on a 'surge' and not bring the troops back to the USA? It's amusing how some americans when speaking of the Iraq defeat, as in Vietnam, do anything to embrace a polyanish language to avoid the idea that the USA LOST the war.

 

Oh yes, the "surge" is quite the white flag of surrender isn't it?

 

I'm still waiting for you to explain to me how we've "lost". It's amusing how extremists want the US to lose in Iraq so badly they'll do almost anything - like declare defeat without any meaningful context or evidence. How many have we lost? About 3,560 per DoD. How many have they lost? over 66,000 per http://www.iraqbodycount.net/.

 

Uh..according to the math, we're killing about 20 people for our 1. Now, tell me how we're losing again?

 

I know reliving the 60's sounds like a lot of fun. And it's always a gas to see the world as black and white, support the underdog and pop LSD. Eventually, though, you're going to have to put forth a little more effort or no one's going to listen to you. That's what the hippies learned anyway...

[Realitycheck]

I If we left, they would have no reason to keep on.

Right? Is this war on plundering the spoils of Iraq and spreading chaos throughout the lands, or is this war on the American occupation? It really does not get any simpler than this.

[armygas]

So the gist of the matter is, do we have to kill all of the foreign fighters or could the Iraqis do it, in your opinion? Why couldn't they do it, if not? They have had time to train for a while, with better oversight than the average army. They will be armed to the teeth, compared to the foreign fighters, right? It looks like we might already start pulling back this spring.

 

I do hope the Iraqi Army can stand on its own very soon........... but I will bet anyone that there will be a substantial number of U.S. Forces in Iraq for at least the next twenty years.

 

So have fun debating the politics of this (talk about it until your blue in the face), whatever you views are the fact is we are there and we are going to stay there. For those of you who understand defensive tactics, it is one of the United States' most strategic "listening posts" in the world and the draw-down of Korea and Germany allows for a shift of forces.

 

Any takers on the bet?

[armygas]

Come the end of 2007 the U.S. Congress will start cutting off funds for the fiasco and most of the REPUBLICAN Senators will be on side with the American people.

 

Again your soothsaying finds you speaking through your orifice used for the expulsion of methane......

[foodchain]

 

I do hope the Iraqi Army can stand on its own very soon........... but I will bet anyone that there will be a substantial number of U.S. Forces in Iraq for at least the next twenty years.

 

So have fun debating the politics of this (talk about it until your blue in the face), whatever you views are the fact is we are there and we are going to stay there. For those of you who understand defensive tactics, it is one of the United States' most strategic "listening posts" in the world and the draw-down of Korea and Germany allows for a shift of forces.

 

Any takers on the bet?

 

I disagree. Japan and Germany, that entire war was a different environment all around the board in so many ways no short post, or collection of long ones for that matter could really muster it in a short period of time.

 

I don’t think we can hold Iraq as a post if the country worsens over time due to siege. Its that simple, sun tzu knew siege was the worst type of conflict and I don’t really see a difference with this. Our leaders or people in charge of the military went for a battle military in a traditional warfare type sense. I doubt any military in the world could stand to it, but Iraq is far from that type of a conflict and it shows. If Iraq continues to be what it is, politics will give a new president on the vote to bring the troops home. I mean we have troops over seas having to give small unit fire commands on enemy units not scene in urban ambushes that in themselves can collapse to splintered ambush scenarios with snipers and IED laden vehicles. Its not something out in the open with smart bombs knocking out tank formations and entrenched lines of soldiers.

 

I would hate to say this, but I think one of the other issues that has bogged us down, is in the intelligence game, I would say our enemy, whatever that happens to be can be just as good as us if not better over there, and I think that is one of the most important aspects of this conflict. Another one is the fact that if we cant break the stalemate, well then the war continues to be one that kills nothing but the locals, and then what faith should the locals have for us? More so with all the integration issues of bringing and Iraqi army online, anyone have a cost estimate for this? OR even how to make sure its safe and not corrupted like so many other aspects of Iraq, from the government, down to the police forces?

[armygas]

Its not something out in the open with smart bombs knocking out tank formations and entrenched lines of soldiers.

 

Agreed, its called 4th generation warfare and the concept is currently taught to every soldier during initial training.....and we are not "laying or holding seige" (do you know what seige means?) Explain to me how we are laying or holding seige?

 

I wish we wouldn't be there in twenty years, but I would be willing to bet my house we will be....any takers?

 

Actually, if you remember, Rumsfeld wanted the small, counter-insurgency war (like you speak of) that was quick and decisive, look where that plan landed us. Things may have been different had we went in with the build up that we had in 1991. We would have had better control of the major cities and the insurgency would not have initially gone unchecked.

[foodchain]

Agreed, its called 4th generation warfare and the concept is currently taught to every soldier during initial training.....and we are not "laying or holding seige" (do you know what seige means?) Explain to me how we are laying or holding seige?

 

I wish we wouldn't be there in twenty years, but I would be willing to bet my house we will be....any takers?

 

Actually, if you remember, Rumsfeld wanted the small, counter-insurgency war (like you speak of) that was quick and decisive, look where that plan landed us. Things may have been different had we went in with the build up that we had in 1991. We would have had better control of the major cities and the insurgency would not have initially gone unchecked.

 

The war is typically nothing but urban, involved the locals and is basically ruining, nation, state, city, whatever you want to call it. We don’t have control, and we seek it in major by use of military force.

 

siege /sidʒ/ Pronunciation Key - Show Spelled Pronunciation[seej] Pronunciation Key - Show IPA Pronunciation noun, verb, sieged, sieg·ing.

–noun 1. the act or process of surrounding and attacking a fortified place in such a way as to isolate it from help and supplies, for the purpose of lessening the resistance of the defenders and thereby making capture possible.

2. any prolonged or persistent effort to overcome resistance.

3. a series of illnesses, troubles, or annoyances besetting a person or group: a siege of head colds.

4. a prolonged period of trouble or annoyance.

5. Also, sedge. Ornithology. a. a flock of herons.

b. the station of a heron at prey.

 

6. the shelf or floor of a glassmaking furnace on which the glass pots are set.

7. Obsolete. a. a seat, esp. one used by a person of distinction, as a throne.

b. station as to rank or class.

 

–verb (used with object) 8. to assail or assault; besiege.

—Idiom9. lay siege to, to besiege: The army laid siege to the city for over a month.

 

 

From dictionary.com

[armygas]

The war is typically nothing but urban, involved the locals and is basically ruining, nation, state, city, whatever you want to call it. We don’t have control, and we seek it in major by use of military force.

 

siege /sidʒ/ Pronunciation Key - Show Spelled Pronunciation[seej] Pronunciation Key - Show IPA Pronunciation noun, verb, sieged, sieg·ing.

–noun 1. the act or process of surrounding and attacking a fortified place in such a way as to isolate it from help and supplies, for the purpose of lessening the resistance of the defenders and thereby making capture possible.

2. any prolonged or persistent effort to overcome resistance.

3. a series of illnesses, troubles, or annoyances besetting a person or group: a siege of head colds.

4. a prolonged period of trouble or annoyance.

5. Also, sedge. Ornithology. a. a flock of herons.

b. the station of a heron at prey.

 

6. the shelf or floor of a glassmaking furnace on which the glass pots are set.

7. Obsolete. a. a seat, esp. one used by a person of distinction, as a throne.

b. station as to rank or class.

 

–verb (used with object) 8. to assail or assault; besiege.

—Idiom9. lay siege to, to besiege: The army laid siege to the city for over a month.

 

 

From dictionary.com

 

So are we not allowing aid and supplies into Iraq? I think we are allowing supplies and aid into the country, thus the primary definition of seige is ruled out.

 

Do you think we will be leaving soon? Unfortunately I think not, any bets on which one of these facilities turns into a permanent base?

http://www.globalsecurity.org/military/facility/iraq.htm

 

I spent alot of time here http://www.globalsecurity.org/military/world/iraq/al-iskandaryah.htm

 

and here http://www.globalsecurity.org/military/world/iraq/baghdad-green-zone.htm (I was there when the hotel got hit)

 

of those two my money is on the green zone, do you think we are spending all that money building this up and then not stay there?

 

 

You can read all the current briefings here http://www.globalsecurity.org/index.html

[foodchain]

So are we not allowing aid and supplies into Iraq? I think we are allowing supplies and aid into the country, thus the primary definition of seige is ruled out.

 

Its half and half I would think plus other aspects of the definition do apply.

[Realitycheck]

 

I do hope the Iraqi Army can stand on its own very soon........... but I will bet anyone that there will be a substantial number of U.S. Forces in Iraq for at least the next twenty years.

 

So have fun debating the politics of this (talk about it until your blue in the face), whatever you views are the fact is we are there and we are going to stay there. For those of you who understand defensive tactics, it is one of the United States' most strategic "listening posts" in the world and the draw-down of Korea and Germany allows for a shift of forces.

 

Any takers on the bet?

 

I agree with you. With the current administration, all I see every single day is we will stay, we will stay. Every time I say something, I read something that contradicts what I say, displaying all of the different factors and dynamics of this war. But, if the Democrats sweep the elections, which is likely, don't bet on it. Of course, that is a long time from now.

[armygas]

http://www.globalsecurity.org/org/news/2004/040323-enduring-bases.htm

 

I know its old but knowing the history of the U.S., odds are we are there a long time.....

 

 

Also, did you all know about this? http://www.globalsecurity.org/wmd/library/news/iraq/2006/06/iraq-060629-afps02.htm

and http://www.2la.org/syria/iraq-wmd.php also check out the poll on the topic

[geoguy]

http://www.globalsecurity.org/org/news/2004/040323-enduring-bases.htm

 

I know its old but knowing the history of the U.S., odds are we are there a long time.....

 

 

Also, did you all know about this? http://www.globalsecurity.org/wmd/library/news/iraq/2006/06/iraq-060629-afps02.htm

and http://www.2la.org/syria/iraq-wmd.php also check out the poll on the topic

 

your reference is comical. WMDs. wow. It's June of 2007 and your pathetic attempts to justify the lies are akin to Hitler in his bunker pointing to a Jew in a Soviet uniform and screaming 'See. I told you so!'

 

Fortunately not all Americans are willing to roll around in cow dung of lies any longer.

[Cap'n Refsmmat]

Godwin's Law has taken effect, and that's when we know a thread is really down the drain.

 

This thread is now, to borrow a term from geoguy, a pile of cow dung. Insults, no matter how subtle, are not tolerated. I guess I should have watched this more carefully from the start.

 

Closed.

[Pangloss]

Thanks Cap'n. I was out travelling over the weekend and wasn't able to pay attention to these threads and I appreciate you jumping on this. I'm disappointed that it degraded to this extent.