To: TimF who wrote (323943 ) 1/31/2007 3:12:47 PM From: Alighieri Read Replies (1) | Respond to of 1576160 No we aren't. Compared to our population, compared to the size of our army, even compared to the number of new recruits losses are small. Compared to previous wars, again losses are small. If you mean economic losses, well then again losses are small compared to the size of our economy when measured against previous American wars, or previous serious wars waged by other countries. I mean in the aggregate our losses are huge. Not just in manpower and treasure, but in world standing, in credibility, erosion of influence, ally support, you name it...ability to move on, extracate ourselves, shape an agenda beyond iraq, help towards a stable ME or anywhere else in the world. And absolutely no end in sight. This ranks right up there with the biggest disasters in american history, not for what has happened already, but for what is very likely to happen in the future as a result. Man...think beyond the obvious. Even if it was true that no one believed that more soldiers can make a difference (and that isn't true), and even if you assume that more soldiers won't eventually achieve victory, that doesn't mean that the soldiers are just confused targets. They are competent capable people, no more confused than soldiers at war are generally confused. They are lost. Can't speak the language and can't tell friend from foe...let alone understand the culture. At any base in iraq, american soldiers can't tell their iraqi counterparts the nature of a mission before the morning of the mission. Then they have to confiscate all cell phones before they tell them, or the mission is communicated to insurgents. The army is completely infiltrated with people whose loyalty is to their respective sect. You know NOTHING about this. Al