The Iraq war is lost

[DosEquis]

And their influence in africa is because africa has nothing to lose. The only people they can recruit are people with nothing to lose. Their tactics are suicide bombing and things that show very little interest in the survival of the "islamic soldier". They are never, ever going to be able to recruit that many people where they are going to start taking over countries. Period.

Unless you are one of those that question the intentions of the first muslim elected to congress, and asking if he is "one of them" in television interviews.

[RMNIXON]

Originally Posted by ballz2wallz

When we lost our morale and our desire to win.

This, as evidenced by all the latest news, is a recent occurence.

It does look that way. I am just not sure of the consequences. The idea that Foreign Insurgency ends when we leave is just dead wrong. I would prefer a "pullback" at some point soon and see if things get better or worse?

[ballz2wallz]

Originally Posted by DosEquis

Unless you are one of those that question the intentions of the first muslim elected to congress, and asking if he is "one of them" in television interviews.

I have no reason to suspect such a thing, unless he gives me one

[SICKGUY]

Originally Posted by ballz2wallz

The long-term effects of this on our country is not good.

then we probably should have never gone to war with iraq

[Diamond Cross]

We would've had to one way or the other.

[Scrum]

Originally Posted by Diamond Cross

We would've had to one way or the other.

Why do you say that?

[Diamond Cross]

The biggest reason is because he was working for two things: A: Nuclear arms and B: destabilization of the Middle East. He may never of had nuclear weapons or materials, but he would've eventually destabilized the Middle east through his targeting of Israel and conflicts with Iran.

[avsp]

Although the 'failure of will' present in the Amercan people (read: failure to understand the conflict, its causes & rationale) & the subsequent lack of support for the effort is a significant factor it is not this that has directly led to the 'defeat'

It seems to me that to claim otherwise is essentially a deflectionist exercise designed to blame political opponents & thus is ultimately a divisive endeavour in itself.

Worse the failure to appreciate the reality of the situation likely means that there will be support for failing spectacularly again in the future.

The 'defeat' has arisen because the troops were/are not sufficiently/adequately trained, resourced & equipped to achieve the goal of 'nation building', whereas those factions ranged against them understood clearly how to make a state ungovernavble. Further numerous obvious mistakes were made by the initial post-war administrations in Iraq

Admitedly the Coalitions task was a much more difficult one than that of their enemies but OTOH they were the instigators & should have planned more expertly, ..., as opposed the the lamentably p*ss-poor performance that was turned in. They quite literally did not understand their task. This despite proclaiming that they did.

The defeat is both a political & miltary one. Both have largely arrisen out of a failure to understand the difference between force & power

Lastly, as far as the 'failure of will' present in the American people, ..., did it in any way come about because they felt that the admin had misinformed them about the war? If so, whose fault is that?

[avsp]

Originally Posted by ballz2wallz

You think they need a military to take over the world? Look at France or Holland.

They are slowly creating their 'army' all over the world as it is, in every continent. All they need is a few more decades when the world is sympathetic enough to their cause, governments have let them gain influence, and not a thing can be done. Their 'takeover' won't be by military, but it'll be by the people that have slowly grown up in the West. They will be like a fungus...these 'sleeper cells' won't be asleep any longer...they will rise up and take things that they claim as theirs. And what's worse is the world is slowly giving it to them. Their grasp in Africa and Asia is already beyond all comprehension. It won't be long until the West looks the same. France and Holland are good examples of what's to come if things continue as they are.

This seems more than somewhat bizare, ..., but if its how you see it why then would not a similar counter-campaign be possible?

Afterall we've gott sat tv straight into their home now

Lastly, (there always has to be one, doesnt there?), what is this supposed to mean "Their grasp in Africa and Asia is already beyond all comprehension."?

[ballz2wallz]

Originally Posted by avsp

It seems to me that to claim otherwise is essentially a deflectionist exercise designed to blame political opponents & thus is ultimately a divisive endeavour in itself.

No, it's really not. In fact, I see these actions (withdrawal from Iraq) as very possible political posturing to be used by the Democrats in '08. They can, and very most likely will, use this as a 'see, I told you we'd get us out of this mess' to boost their votes. And I have no doubt it will help them.

No, this is no attack on either political party. This is nothing more than an observance of the current mood on Iraq. It's quickly gone from 'we will win' to 'we can't do anything at all'. If that is our state of morale, it's time to pull out.

Like O'Reilly said last night, there were many of us that thought we could pull this off, and we were all wrong.

[avsp]

Oh yeah b2w, as usual i wish to object to your failure to differentiate between jihadists & the entire populations within which they arise.

[ballz2wallz]

Originally Posted by avsp

Lastly, (there always has to be one, doesnt there?), what is this supposed to mean "Their grasp in Africa and Asia is already beyond all comprehension."?

Their political influences, control, and desire to make those areas 'theirs'. We don't hear about it much, but it's scary how much control they have in those areas. And it's constant death and destruction over there.

[ballz2wallz]

Originally Posted by avsp

Oh yeah b2w, as usual i wish to object to your failure to differentiate between jihadists & the entire populations withuin which they arise.

I object to your failure to recognize such a potential threat.

[avsp]

Originally Posted by ballz2wallz

No, it's really not. In fact, I see these actions (withdrawal from Iraq) as very possible political posturing to be used by the Democrats in '08. They can, and very most likely will, use this as a 'see, I told you we'd get us out of this mess' to boost their votes. And I have no doubt it will help them.

that may be the case, but that isnt what has caused the defeat

No, this is no attack on either political party. This is nothing more than an observance of the current mood on Iraq. It's quickly gone from 'we will win' to 'we can't do anything at all'. If that is our state of morale, it's time to pull out.

As you are very well aware there are those who have felt that the prospect of getting bogged down in Iraq was a good enough reason not to go. Further you are similarly aware that some have been saying that there is next to nowt that can be done in Iraq for nearly 3 years now & that this in itself was, largely, the problem.

Thus, as such a person, I can see only advantages in such a realisation.

Like O'Reilly said last night, there were many of us that thought we could pull this off, and we were all wrong.

I'm not that familiar with O'Reilly, he seems to be a bullying demented troll, so, ..., who is this 'we' of whom he speaks?


Either way I reiterate, the defeat is a military & political one that occured long before the collapse in support for the war Stateside. To argue otherwise is not only to miss the point but also deflectionist, as evidenced by your subsequent comments questioning the motives of those you see as your political opponents.

This is not to say that the collapse in support for the war is not important. But then the collapse isnt only amongst any single political party, is it?

IMO, the Baker-Hamilton report provides an opportunity to move beyond party poltical bickerings, ..., perhaps thats too 'idealiast' & not 'pragmatist' enough though

[avsp]

Originally Posted by ballz2wallz

I object to your failure to recognize such a potential threat.

but i dont, ..., which is why i make the distinction

[avsp]

Originally Posted by ballz2wallz

Their political influences, control, and desire to make those areas 'theirs'. We don't hear about it much, but it's scary how much control they have in those areas. And it's constant death and destruction over there.

So, its not 'beyond comprehension' then?

Further

It is not all of Africa, nor of Asia

The recent rising conflict between Ethiopia & Somalia have got some news coverage here

The situation in Nigeria I would agree is almost 'beyond comprehension' complicated as it is by tribal rivalries & oil

As for Asia, ..., it really huge, which events are you talking about?

As for 'a desire to make it theirs', ..., Rumsfeld has f*cked up such US desires in central Asia & China's such aims are the ones I'd characterise as the most succesfull in much of Asia & also right across Africa, ..., but then I may well be wrong

[IminWonderland]

Originally Posted by avsp

Either way I reiterate, the defeat is a military & political one that occured long before the collapse in support for the war Stateside. To argue otherwise is not only to miss the point but also deflectionist, as evidenced by your subsequent comments questioning the motives of those you see as your political opponents.

I find this quote to be incredibley accurate. This failure didn't happen because of the morale of the country. This country had blinders on the situation from day one except about 20% of the country. A country doesn't even go from that kind of blind support for an action like they did with this one, this war was almost fully supported from the Congress, to the constituents. If you weren't for the government, you were against the government. And then failure upon failure, this war has been unsuccessful since they over threw Saddam. They were better off with him as a let loose criminal to chase, than try to accomplish what they decided to accomplish when their war didn't last long enough for them. This has been screwed for a VERY VERY long time, and the fact that it took this long for the rest of the country, the congress and Senate, as well as the media, and every other person that thought that this war was a grand idea from when the goal was taking out Saddam, to finding WMD, to instill democracy, to getting terrorists.....I'm glad that everyone else has finally come to their senses, because this has been insane that a people would let their government take them down the road that they have.

[ballz2wallz]

It seems someone else shares my sentiments:

But here’s a question: Since when did the United States or any country wage war by publishing its plans or suggested plans for all the world to see? Since when did the United States or any country let its enemies see internal deliberations and strategic pivots, and since when did we think our enemies shared our interests, either in one war theater or on a more broad strategic plane? Since when did we wage war by a geriatric committee of has-beens and shady Washington insiders? Since when has there been anything to talk about with the world’s two worst remaining terrorist states?


To me, the ISG report represents the end of the sole-superpower world. We’re not a superpower anymore, not if our so-called best and brightest think that this report represents anything useful, and not if we think it’s wise to put our war planning up to a body of old hands with no new ideas, and subject their findings to an international review.

[IminWonderland]

Originally Posted by ballz2wallz

It seems someone else shares my sentiments:

When the government gets caught with their pants down and their dick in the wind, they don't deserve to be a super power. Their incompetence should not be rewarded by the world community.

[Scrum]

Originally Posted by IminWonderland

When the government gets caught with their pants down and their dick in the wind, they don't deserve to be a super power. Their incompetence should not be rewarded by the world community.

That doesn't jive very well with the "might makes right" people.