Question on Iraq

[Redskin in Canada]

Now that being said, I challenge you to prove that these losses (I'm assuming that your talking about Vietnam and maybe Somalia to some extent) were military defeats. Defeats they were, but there are ways to win wars without defeating your opponents military.

Which one of these two is a victory?

I am not making my point clear. A political defeat is as bad as a military defeat in -my- book.

Your correct here, but I don't think that this vulnerability lies necessarily in our ability to fight it, but rather because we are, as you've and others eluded to or flat out said, in a society that does not stomach prolonged combat operations.

If you were facing the most formidable and powerful armed forces in the world, would you attack their strengths or their weaknesses? Just asking.

Problem is, we're in the stage were it will be years or decades to win.

Indeed. So, why would anybody not re-design a different mission with different objectives in mind?

I'm not understanding what your saying here. How have US Soldiers done this?? I'm not saying your wrong, but I cannot think of any examples that would support your statement, so I assuming I'm not understanding what your trying to say.

Well publicised torture, rapes, violence against civilians, allegations of siding with one religious or ethnic group against others, etc

This war would be over tomorrow if the populace would outright support us and turnin all the insurgents.

Why were they not the main target to keep them on your side pro-actively?

but it is not a war of attrition. By defination a war of attrition is focused on resources and the insurgency is not trying to attrite our nations resources (not even the soldiers if you consider us to be a resource).

You are right. I should have completed the sentence: this is a war of political attrition.

I don't think the American public feels the orginal invasion was justified in hindsight, and thus, no longer want to win the war it evolved into. Now that's a fair opinion, but I also fear that people are failing to seperate the "If we should stay" with the "why did we go."

Why should they? Why should they -trust- any answer that is given to them this time?

The main target is not in Iraq. The main target is somewhere in the boundary region between Pakistan and Afghanistan. THAT would get the American people back into focus.

[DarthMonk]

I'd like to ask you all a question on the current public perception on Iraq.

Throughout all the political debates, media coverage, and general public opinion on Iraq, the overwhelming theme/belief is that what is currently happening is a complete disaster and a mess. Why is that the prevailing belief?

Because going there in the first place was an asanine move.

How many cells of Al Quaeda existed worldwide before we invaded - I'm sorry - liberated? 1? 10? 100? Let's say 100 is the closest power of 10.

How many were in Iraq? I say the closest power of 10 is 1. There may have been zero.

Now how much Al Quaeda is there? If you are going to support the Bush Admin. you have to say all kinds of Al Quaeda is there.

What we did was pour gas on a small fire and now it's a confligration. We had the good will of practically the entire planet and we turned into venom which will make us less secure for generations. Imagine if we had simply asassinated Saddaam (if removing him from power is what was really wanted) and devoted all this money and manpower to intelligence gatheing.

To say we have Al Quaeda bottled up in Iraq (not that you said that) is a complete joke. We frickin' blew it. Shock and Awe - yeah. More like

QUAGMIRE ACCOMPLISHED!

DarthMonk

[KazooSkinsFan]

If we win this war, what's going to change?

As someone who opposed the invasion I think we would have agreed it would have been better not to. I hope we agree a better solution is to stop meddling in the middle east and let oil prices flow rather then be secured by the military as practiced by both parties and let the middle easterners work out their own issues.

But as of now, I think your question is backward. We can't change the past and now the question is what if we lose? Losing would provide the real recruiter for the Islamic extremists becuase the US doesn't have the will to win and can and have been defeated. Losing now would plunge the Iraqis into chaos and betray our having toppled their government.

It would have been better had we not invaded, but now that we are there we cannot lose. And that is worth supporting our troopsfor.