Hi i-node; Re: "He wasn't cheerleading. He believed, just as the Bush administration did, that the Iraqi people would seize the opportunity they were given, as did I. All three were wrong. ...
Friedman had a lot of background on the Middle East. As did the people who were calling the shots in the Bush Administration. Everyone turned out to be wrong.";
Not *everyone* was wrong about how bloody Iraq and Afghanistan would be:
Bilow March 5, 2003
We have enough to conquer Baghdad, but as far as keeping Iraq under military control in the face of a hostile civilian population, we are woefully undermanned. Here's proof, from the military itself:
Force Requirements in Stability Operations
James T. Quinlivan, Parameters, Winter 1995
...
Iraq has a population of 24 million. Using the 20 per 1000 ratio that Britain used in bringing Northern Ireland under control, the US will need an occupation force of 480,000. Oh, and those are Army forces, you don't get to count the Air Force or Navy, and in the event of ongoing terrorism (i.e. the Israeli experience) they could get stuck there for years. And only then, after tens of thousands of body bags, we retreat with our tails between our legs, having relearned the lesson that our fathers learned in Korea and Vietnam -- don't get involved in land wars in Asia unless you can get some other party to supply the cannon fodder.
Message 18657926
Bilow, March 7, 2003
I've noted before that the belief that the residents of Baghdad will come out with flowers for us is a delusion. Also note that I predicted within a few days of 9/11 that the Afghans would greet us with flowers. The difference is simple. We had a history of helping Afghanistan against the Russians, particularly under Reagan. Our history in Iraq is one of killing their soldiers (i.e. fathers, brothers and sons), destroying their infrastructure, and depriving the population of the benefits of free trade. Also, Afghanistan was a non Arab country being run by Arabs, a foreign invader, while Iraq is an Arab country being run by an Arab, so there was in Afghanistan a certain xenophobia already in place against the Taliban.
Message 18671309
Bilow, March 24, 2003
Instead, we'll be in Baghdad in days, if not weeks. And faced with a sullen, unbeaten, unbowed population that will shoot the shit out of us, just like Vietnam.
Message 18743807
Bilow, December 2003
And now I say that the resistance will continue unabated, and that it will continue until we leave, and that if we leave Iraq with a regime that is compatible with our national interests, the resistance will continue against that regime, and eventually overturn it.
Message 19601242
-- Carl
P.S. Most of the people who said that Iraq would be a quagmire said the same thing about Afghanistan. I didn't. I wish we'd stopped there; maybe we could have done a better job:
Bilow, September 15, 2001
If we go to Afghanistan or Iraq, we will kick their butts. These countries are run by a few people who have deluded themselves into thinking that they can resist the military might of the West. They were deluded when they tried this with Saddam's elite Republican Guard tank force (which had conquered the vast forces of Iran) in the Gulf War, and now they believe that if they fight us in the mountains and towns they'll reverse the verdict. Due to advances in weapons technology that we have and they don't they will again be destroyed at relatively low casualty rates for ourselves. (But likely worse than the ~300 we lost in the Gulf War.)
...
This is not at all a "fair" fight. Don't worry about it.
Message 16357532
Britain fought the Afghanistanis with the same weapons (rifles) that the Afghanistanis defended themselves with. Britain had no air support, so they were unable to tell where the Afghanis were. In addition, Britain pissed off the locals.
...
The Russian situation is different, but similar. Russia went in against the Afghanistanis and we supplied them with sophisticated antiaircraft weapons. That eliminated the Russian air control advantage. Oh, and they really pissed off the locals, with atrocities similar to the one quoted above. The result was similar to the problems that the British had.
...
I wouldn't worry too much about Afghanistan. Like I said, all indications are that it will not be bloody at all. It is possible that you will see a happy mob scene similar to the one when US troops rolled into Kuwait. The Taliban has been running the country into the ground, and there's a lot of indications that they're tired of it. We'll probably let the Muslim countries take care of overseeing elections and replacing the Taliban with something democratic. Heck, Turkey is a Moslem country, and they've been in NATO for decades. You could be booking a vacation in Kabul summer after next. [oops]
Message 16357787
Bilow, October 16, 2001
Hi Condor; The hard liners will dissolve in tears of love as soon as we get shown pictures of Afghanistani children celebrating the liberation of Kabul. But as long as there is still fighting to be done the government has to promote some of that hard edge. Killing is not easy to stomach. It will dissolve soon enough, I predict.
Message 16509264
Bilow, October 21, 2001
Hi chooseanother; Re winter coming. The approach of winter is a very good thing for the U.S., very bad for the Taliban. ... (3) The U.S. prefers to fight at night, and the winter will provide long nights. ...
Message 16534770 |
