Upheaval Ahead
- Thread starter Mcluhan
- Start date
In order to side-step the inevitable charges of perversely pedantic pontification from the pulpit, I will be brief. If the next election came down a choice between Buchanan and Ted Kennedy- I'd root for Kennedy. The old-school Massachussets liberalism was always at its finest in opposition to right-wing populist blowhards just one degree removed from the people who wear the white robes with the pointy hats while causing crosses to light up in the night.
A Politician without a Home
I don't think Trunc actually read the attached article. I think he likes the idea of right-wing leaderless anarchists.
I was surprised by the piece. Buchanan actually wrote something intelligent, instead of his usual rabble-rousing. He doesn't seem very happy about the war or the state of American politics.
I don't think Trunc actually read the attached article. I think he likes the idea of right-wing leaderless anarchists.
I was surprised by the piece. Buchanan actually wrote something intelligent, instead of his usual rabble-rousing. He doesn't seem very happy about the war or the state of American politics.
Looks like he is trying to make a case for himself as the anti war candidate. Buchanan was opposed to the war from the get go, and he made some valid points. He has his own website and you can read up on his articles.
BTW I have agreed with him from the get go on he war issue. Again he is right on with this one.
The senate and the congress have failed to act responsible in this matter. However once we had decided to go to war, we should have finished it, but we decided to play nice and are now paying the price.
We either get serious or we get the hell out.
BTW I have agreed with him from the get go on he war issue. Again he is right on with this one.
The senate and the congress have failed to act responsible in this matter. However once we had decided to go to war, we should have finished it, but we decided to play nice and are now paying the price.
We either get serious or we get the hell out.
Okay Lange, let's imagine for a moment you are the man in charge, Cheney, how would you get serious about the war in Iraq and finish it.
use all the force necessary to get rid of the insurgency.
There might be some innocent people dying in the process, but they are dying now already.
i get the feeling that after the media stunt of "mission accomplished' one hand of the army was tied behind their back, because we are afraid of perception.
My question is...how much more can they hate us?
If we are not willing to pay the poltical price, we should get the hell out of there.
There might be some innocent people dying in the process, but they are dying now already.
i get the feeling that after the media stunt of "mission accomplished' one hand of the army was tied behind their back, because we are afraid of perception.
My question is...how much more can they hate us?
If we are not willing to pay the poltical price, we should get the hell out of there.
Okay, lets explore the solution in that context. A raft of generals over the last two weeks have gone on the record as saying (paraphrasing) "the war in Iraq cannot be won." It sums up to the fact that when you kill one 'insurgent' it creates three. (seems they are finally recognising the tribal law of revenge at work). Let's say the number of insurgents is somewhere between 20,000 and 40,000, the numbers given. How do you imagine you would take these people out? (a practical solution would be nice to hear).langeweile said:use all the force necessary to get rid of the insurgency.
There might be some innocent people dying in the process, but they are dying now already.
i get the feeling that after the media stunt of "mission accomplished' one hand of the army was tied behind their back, because we are afraid of perception.
My question is...how much more can they hate us?
If we are not willing to pay the poltical price, we should get the hell out of there.
As far a using Iraqi troops, that isn't going to happen, so you are faced with using US troops to commit what most people would call genocide, or ethnic cleansing.
Listening...
First, I don't believe ther are 20000 to 40000 insurgents. Second, most of the "insurgents" (I prefer the word terrorists) are foreigners. an assembly of whatever extremists are left from al Quaeda, Hezbollah etc..
Third, this mission can't be accomplished by without the support of the Iraqi army, impossible. judging by the last two military actions the Iraqis are playing a much larger role now.
From the way some of these actions went, there seems to be an increase of force used, which is the correct way to go.
IMO a lot of what i mentioned earlier is happening already.
How do you define "won"?
my definition is, once the Iraqi goverment is elected and the security forces (army and police) are capable of holding their own, it is time for Iraq to manage their own affairs.
Third, this mission can't be accomplished by without the support of the Iraqi army, impossible. judging by the last two military actions the Iraqis are playing a much larger role now.
From the way some of these actions went, there seems to be an increase of force used, which is the correct way to go.
IMO a lot of what i mentioned earlier is happening already.
How do you define "won"?
my definition is, once the Iraqi goverment is elected and the security forces (army and police) are capable of holding their own, it is time for Iraq to manage their own affairs.
Just as I suspected - you are not informed. Oh well..langeweile said:First, I don't believe ther are 20000 to 40000 insurgents. Second, most of the "insurgents" (I prefer the word terrorists) are foreigners. an assembly of whatever extremists are left from al Quaeda, Hezbollah etc..
Third, this mission can't be accomplished by without the support of the Iraqi army, impossible. judging by the last two military actions the Iraqis are playing a much larger role now.
This war is not going to be won anytime soon.
But there is no out without absolute disgrace for America and it's Allies. There between a rock and a hard spot.
Lange feels we should carpet bomb the place.
Well Lange, the last I heard there were over 100,000 Iraqi's killed in this campaign. And the only thing it's done is destroy the entire Iraq infrastructure.
The day that this war get's "won" is likely ten or more years off. There never going to stop fighting the Allies, and each other. At least Sadaam was so ruthless that he kept the population in check. Now it's absolute chaos.
No this war is already lost. And by the time it's over this Administration will be long gone. Hundreds of thousands of Iraqi's will be dead. We'll continue to read about daily bombings and kidnappings in Iraq. Thousands of US soldier's will be killed. The US will be seriously crippled economically. The US will not have the resources to fight China, Russia, Korea...or whatever despot arises in this world and threatens US interests. The economy will plummet and likely never really recover....And the worst part about it, the people that started it will be really rich, and they'll be long gone and forgotten, and there's no way out !
Maybe this Administration should bring back there " boy in Bagdhad ". He seemed to know how to keep things in check.
Guy
But there is no out without absolute disgrace for America and it's Allies. There between a rock and a hard spot.
Lange feels we should carpet bomb the place.
Well Lange, the last I heard there were over 100,000 Iraqi's killed in this campaign. And the only thing it's done is destroy the entire Iraq infrastructure.
The day that this war get's "won" is likely ten or more years off. There never going to stop fighting the Allies, and each other. At least Sadaam was so ruthless that he kept the population in check. Now it's absolute chaos.
No this war is already lost. And by the time it's over this Administration will be long gone. Hundreds of thousands of Iraqi's will be dead. We'll continue to read about daily bombings and kidnappings in Iraq. Thousands of US soldier's will be killed. The US will be seriously crippled economically. The US will not have the resources to fight China, Russia, Korea...or whatever despot arises in this world and threatens US interests. The economy will plummet and likely never really recover....And the worst part about it, the people that started it will be really rich, and they'll be long gone and forgotten, and there's no way out !
Maybe this Administration should bring back there " boy in Bagdhad ". He seemed to know how to keep things in check.
Guy
So that is your answer?
This issue had been discussed here before. For any of your sources I can find a source to dispute that?
So I guess the conclusion is we start the name calling again? Just because i don't agree with your assesment... I am stupid and ill informed now?
Unless you are sitting in some camp in Iraq, you and i have to rely on second information. Unfortunately these days, information is tainted by political bias. There are vey few, if any, clearly unbias people out there.
I just don't believe that there is that many insurgents..period. That is my opinion. let's say you are right, what % does 40000 represent out of 26 MM?? Wouldn't that suggest that most Iraqis just wanna live in peace?
I believe that the Iraqis themselves are fed up with being slaughtered by the thousands. Mind you, not by Americans, but by religous fanatics and the very same people that done them harm before.
While they might pray to a different God, most people want what we want. Live in peace, free of fear, have a nice car, have a nice house. Make sure your kids grow up safe and healthy..etc..etc..
I agree that they want the US to leave sooner or later, preferably sooner. they also understand that up to this point, the coalition was the only one standing between them and the terrorists.
This has changed and will continue to change.
Just my stupid and uneducated opinion.
This issue had been discussed here before. For any of your sources I can find a source to dispute that?
So I guess the conclusion is we start the name calling again? Just because i don't agree with your assesment... I am stupid and ill informed now?
Unless you are sitting in some camp in Iraq, you and i have to rely on second information. Unfortunately these days, information is tainted by political bias. There are vey few, if any, clearly unbias people out there.
I just don't believe that there is that many insurgents..period. That is my opinion. let's say you are right, what % does 40000 represent out of 26 MM?? Wouldn't that suggest that most Iraqis just wanna live in peace?
I believe that the Iraqis themselves are fed up with being slaughtered by the thousands. Mind you, not by Americans, but by religous fanatics and the very same people that done them harm before.
While they might pray to a different God, most people want what we want. Live in peace, free of fear, have a nice car, have a nice house. Make sure your kids grow up safe and healthy..etc..etc..
I agree that they want the US to leave sooner or later, preferably sooner. they also understand that up to this point, the coalition was the only one standing between them and the terrorists.
This has changed and will continue to change.
Just my stupid and uneducated opinion.
the term carpet bombing was coined by you...i was referring to being overly cautious once a target had been identified.Guy Lafleuer said:This war is not going to be won anytime soon.
But there is no out without absolute disgrace for America and it's Allies. There between a rock and a hard spot.
Lange feels we should carpet bomb the place.
Well Lange, the last I heard there were over 100,000 Iraqi's killed in this campaign. And the only thing it's done is destroy the entire Iraq infrastructure.
The day that this war get's "won" is likely ten or more years off. There never going to stop fighting the Allies, and each other. At least Sadaam was so ruthless that he kept the population in check. Now it's absolute chaos.
No this war is already lost. And by the time it's over this Administration will be long gone. Hundreds of thousands of Iraqi's will be dead. We'll continue to read about daily bombings and kidnappings in Iraq. Thousands of US soldier's will be killed. The US will be seriously crippled economically. The US will not have the resources to fight China, Russia, Korea...or whatever despot arises in this world and threatens US interests. The economy will plummet and likely never really recover....And the worst part about it, the people that started it will be really rich, and they'll be long gone and forgotten, and there's no way out !
Maybe this Administration should bring back there " boy in Bagdhad ". He seemed to know how to keep things in check.
Guy
Lange, i'm not going to do your reading for you. Over the last three weeks a plethora of articles have come out quoting US generals in the field. Read them and you will be informed. The number of foreign 'terrorists' fighting in Iraq is about 1%. The intel data published puts the armed resistance at between 20K and 40K.langeweile said:So that is your answer?
This issue had been discussed here before. For any of your sources I can find a source to dispute that?
So I guess the conclusion is we start the name calling again? Just because i don't agree with your assesment... I am stupid and ill informed now?
Unless you are sitting in some camp in Iraq, you and i have to rely on second information. Unfortunately these days, information is tainted by political bias. There are vey few, if any, clearly unbias people out there.
I just don't believe that there is that many insurgents..period. That is my opinion. let's say you are right, what % does 40000 represent out of 26 MM??
Just my stupid and uneducated opinion.
If I was going to call you names, I would be more creative than 'not informed'. There is also a number of opinions from commanders IN THE FIELD that explain why the iraqi forces are all but useless in the engagement. Do some reading. If you want to call yourself 'stupid' - it's your own call. I'm not about to argue with you on that basis.
good article lloking at both sides of the argument
Last Thros? Maybe in the Land of Make Believe...but not in Iraq.
US strategy in Iraq: Is it working? Major sweeps show results in western Iraq. But insurgents keep adapting and attacking
Last Thros? Maybe in the Land of Make Believe...but not in Iraq.
US strategy in Iraq: Is it working? Major sweeps show results in western Iraq. But insurgents keep adapting and attacking
If you assume that the number of insurgents (or insurgent man hours) per kill has remained constant since the beginning of the insurgency, the steady increase in the number of Iraqi's being slaughtered is a pretty safe indicator that the number of insurgents is increasing quite dramatically. This is from your excellent CS Monitor article:Mcluhan said:Last Thros? Maybe in the Land of Make Believe...but not in Iraq.
US strategy in Iraq: Is it working? Major sweeps show results in western Iraq. But insurgents keep adapting and attacking
"...The attacks of the past few days maintain the insurgent trend of the past half-year or so of targeting lightly armed and less well-protected Iraqi security officers instead of Americans. Through Sunday, 1,095 Iraqi soldiers and police have been killed this year, and that compares with 1,300 Iraqi military and police casualties in the previous 21 months, according to Iraq Coalition Casualty Count (www.icasualties.org/oif/), a nongovernmental organization that tracks civilian and military casualties. Car bombings surged from 65 in February to 135 in April, and major attacks per day rose from around 40 in February and March to 70 in April and May..."
If you use the increase in the number of major attacks per month between February/March and April/May, you're looking at an increase of 75% over a 4 month span. Car bombings increased over 100% in just 3 months. Even if you allow for the possibility that Feb to May was a particularly bad patch, the overall trend is still an exponential increase in the numbers being killed. I'd be willing to bet that the number of insurgents has increased by the same amount.
It is always possible that the insurgents are simply becoming more proficient killers and that the increased death rate isn't indicative of an increase in the number of insurgents. But you'd also expect that the Iraqi security forces would have learned a few lessons and gradually become harder targets so, bottom line, these two possible trends would cancel each other out of the equation.
There is simply no reason to believe those who claim that success is just around the next corner. They've routinely lied to the American people about this war and there is absolutely no indication that this will stop. The numbers also show that success, if ever, is years away.
