SI
SI
discoversearch

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor.  We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community.  If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.
Politics : Foreign Affairs Discussion Group -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?


To: Sig who wrote (128844)4/9/2004 7:34:45 PM
From: Harvey Allen  Read Replies (2) | Respond to of 281500
 
Nearly 40 years ago I voted for the Tonkin Gulf Resolution -- the resolution that led to the war in Vietnam, the deaths of 58,000 Americans, massive protests and a deeply divided country. After all that carnage, we learned that we had based our votes on administration claims that simply were not true. But it was too late. The vote had been taken; the battles had been fought; the lives had been lost.

It's clear that the war in Iraq should never have been fought. The administration's claims on which we went to war simply are not true. In seeking to stop Saddam Hussein, we have created a vortex of violence. In rushing to act without the strong support of the community of nations, America is isolated, and our few allies are targets.

Instead of trying to reconstruct Iraq, we must reconstruct our strategy.

It is not the time to vastly expand the American presence in Iraq; it is time to reduce it. Forty years ago, the United States inundated the Vietnam jungles with American soldiers. What we received in return was 58,000 caskets. The Bush administration must step back from its unilateral approach in Iraq and end the disastrous mistake of this highly visible, made-in-America occupation before it is too late.

washingtonpost.com



To: Sig who wrote (128844)4/10/2004 9:12:15 PM
From: Bilow  Respond to of 281500
 
Hi Sig; Re: "Would you care to make that a prediction?"

I already have, many times. For example:

Bilow, March 23, 2003
Our occupation of Iraq is already a disaster. Eventually we will exit the country with our tail between our legs. These colors, the ones that I love so much, will run. #reply-18742892 also see #reply-19074268 #reply-19480785

If you're looking for a "when" type prediction, you have to take into account domestic political considerations and the mindset of the guy in the White House. I can't predict those with great accuracy, but I would think that we will have withdrawn from Iraq, in failure, within 5 years or so.

We went big into Vietnam in 1963 and managed to last for about a decade, but I don't think that the American public is ready for another debacle like that quite so soon. The absence of a call for a huge troop increase and a draft is telling.

Re: "Now about this old Viet Nam, where the enemy was supported by powerful Communist counties? What powerful country is supporting and supplying our remaining enemy in Iraq?"

You're trying to force history to repeat. It doesn't. At best, it only rhymes.

France was forced out of Algeria with 26,000 dead without any powerful country providing assistance to the rebels. We don't have the guts to take even 1/4 that many in Iraq because Iraq is far less important to us than Algeria was to France.

Re: "How about the Korea war ..."

The differences with Korea are telling: (a) The US had the assistance of a very large South Korean army. (b) The US, a sea power, had very short land supply lines in South Korea, but has rather long supply lines in Iraq.

Re: "... or Kosovo ..."

The population of Kosovo is something around 1 or 2 million. Iraq is 10x larger, so for that reason it doesn't compare well. In addition, we were not fighting significantly on the ground there. This was because, as in Vietnam and Korea, we had significant allies to take the ground casualties for us. For us, Kosovo was mostly an air operation.

In short, the US is an air / sea power, not a ground power. You want us to be a ground power? It's easy enough to do. Require that all 18 year olds spend 2 years in the military.

Re: "... or even Afghanistan which is a far closer comparison to Iraq?

We sent far fewer troops into Afghanistan, so, as with Kosovo, the situation was again one where our air power was used in conjunction with local land forces (Northern Alliance). This is in distinction to Iraq where, as far as the ground fighting goes, it is US all the way.

Re: "Troops not bogged down."

If we're not "bogged down", then how come we've been issuing unilateral ceasefires in Fallujah? You can claim that it's for humanitarian purposes, but anyone with military experience can look at the supply situation and know that our guys ran out of ammo. An offense requires beaucoup supplies, a lot more than a defense, and when we run out, we order a halt (just like we did on the road to Baghdad last year). They'll start the advance again when they get more supplies, unless the politicians tell them to quit sending American boys home in body bags.

The administration expected, before the war, to have US troop levels down to 30,000 by the end of the summer of 2003. Now they're talking about INCREASING the number of US troops through the spring of 2004. If you don't call that "bogged down", I really don't know what you can call it.

Re: "Oh well, I guess the bogging down got left behind,after a few days of bogging down our tanks were in Baghdad."

Maybe you didn't notice it, but the tank commander who got his smiling picture on the front pages a year ago just got sent out Iraq when his tank got destroyed and he lost his eye. His wife is glad that he's alive:

Cigar-toting Hoosier Marine wounded
IndyStar, April 10, 2004
A former Indianapolis man known for his smiling, cigar-smoking image aboard a tank during the capture of Baghdad a year ago Friday was seriously wounded this week after volunteering to go back to the war.

Marine Gunnery Sgt. Nick "Pop" Popaditch, 36, suffered facial injuries and lost an eye after a rocket-propelled grenade hit his tank Wednesday in Fallujah, the military said.
...
"I don't know how I look," he told her on the phone Friday.
"Sweetheart, I don't care," she recounted. "You're alive."

indystar.com

Re: "Bogging is now replaced by chaos. Our chaotic gunfire and chaotic flights by C-130 gunships seem very effective. Chaos is good.Confuses the enemy."

US combat fatalities zoom, and this is the best you can come up with? If chaos is so good, then how come we're losing so many soldiers???

Re: "IMO no more high altitude stuff, except for practice. It will be Warthogs, choppers,Predators, and C-130's at treetop level."

You're ignoring the tactical realities. If we went in so low with so much aircraft, we'd start losing aircraft at an unsustainable rate. Just like the Russkies in Afghanistan.

-- Carl