One idea for more troops in Iraq.

[Desmond Hawkins]

But the smart (and honest) historian does.

What good is the military "victory" if you fail to achieve your political goals?

And we have shown the world that without a doubt to mess with the USA in a conventional war is to invite destruction to your land. Not a good idea to take on the most powerful nation on earth in a conventional war.

That is funny, I thought you were there to liberate the people and bring them democracy, not devastate their lands... If the states was more powerful, they would be able to defeat the insurgency without devestating Iraq.

Well, they could be if we wanted to push the big red button to do it.

Granted, the full force of American conventional power was not brought to bear, but there is a good chance America would still fail even if it did. And if the full power is defeated, the consequences are even worse.

Well that is like saying that all police forces fail since they cant catch all the speeders there ever were. Its silly. Again, to assume that American forces are somehow 'weak' because joe camel sneaks out at night and buries an IED in the road when no one is looking is just beyond stupid. But hey, the world is full of stupid people. That hasnt changed..

Right, the insurgents are just a bunch of criminals getting their jollies, while the marine corps and army are just a bunch of police officers operating under peacetime conditions. A police force usually doesn't deal with an organized body of people whose purpose is to destroy the police force by any means necessary.

Comparing the relentless use of IEDs aimed at American forces to speeders is ridiculous. This is a war, even if the enemy doesn't play the game the same way as you.

Again, you referred to Iraq as being a conventional war, not me. Dont get mad at me for correcting you.

I am saying America's conventional forces are fighting (and ultimately failing) in Iraq. Do you deny this? If America's conventional forces lose to unconventional tactics, it is still a loss for America's conventional forces. Unless of course the Marines/Army are just a glorified police force...

The most conventional purpose for ground forces is to take and hold territory. That is what separates them from "special forces". America can take the territory, but it seems to be having a lot of problems simultaneously holding the entire territory of Iraq.

Get over the legal definitions of words and get to the real meaning of the situation. It is a weakness to not be able to break free of the semantics of words.

 

[Steph]

But the smart (and honest) historian does.

And the honest guy from South Vietnam is probably very happy to know his country fell into communist hands because you lost only politically, and not militarilly.

 

[FriendlyFire]

Some of that reality did intrude in Washington this week when Robert Gates, Bush's nominee to replace his sacked defence secretary, Donald Rumsfeld, was confirmed by the US Senate Armed Services Committee.

The following exchange took place between Gates and senators:

Senator Carl Levin (Democrat): Mr Gates, do you believe that we are currently winning in Iraq?

Gates: No, sir.

Senator John McCain (Republican): We are not winning the war in Iraq, is that correct?

Gates: That is my view, yes, Senator.

McCain: And therefore the status quo is not acceptable?

Gates: That is correct, sir.

Cornered, Bush agreed on Thursday that there had to be a new Iraq policy. But he came out fighting - with the ever loyal British Prime Minister, Tony Blair, at his side.

Clinging more to hope than to policy or strategic planning - "I … believe we're going to succeed. I believe we'll prevail … " - Bush was dismissive of the group's key recommendations and alluded to pending Iraq studies by the Pentagon, the State Department and the National Security Council which observers expect will follow the White House script rather than the bolder line taken by the study group.

http://www.smh.com.au/news/world/bo...ean-exit/2006/12/08/1165081155144.html?page=4

I really do think Bush is telling the truth. Inspite of the massive amounts of evidence stating otherwise. Including from all offical channels. I find it a strange kind of diconnection from reality.