|
|
| Author |
Message |
Pondering
Lion King
Joined: 15 Sep 2005
Posts: 1273
|
 Posted: Fri Feb 09, 2007 5:41 am Post subject: |
 |
|
| P1234567890 wrote: |
But to even mention Somalia and Iraq in the same breath just isn't right. |
You're right, but not for the reasons you think. In Somalia, our initial mission was stop famine, and we did that pretty well. Then the warlords decided to fight each other and US for control of the area....Islamists supported them. At the first real confrontation (we're we killed ALOT more of them than us), we packed up and went home. Islamists recognized that the US didn't have the guts to fight....
| P1234567890 wrote: |
The Iraq debacle is on a MUCH grander scale. By contrast, Somalia was just a little skirmish. Just look at the number of American soldiers killed and wounded. |
We're going to use body counts as an idicator for debacle?
By that measure EVERY war fought by the US (to include the Revolution, Civil War, WWI and WWII) were debacles...
The first Gulf War was an anomaly, the result of a prolonged and significant air campaign coupled with a general Iraqi unwillingness to fight...The end result was an unrealistic expecation that America could go to war and no-one gets hurt.....
| P1234567890 wrote: |
Iraq is more of a Vietnam, and in that sense you should be questioning who is dumber: McNamara or Rummy. |
Again, you're right...but not for why you think. |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
|
|
P1234567890
Emperor of the Universe
Joined: 11 Mar 2006
Posts: 6772
Location: Toronto, Canada
|
| Posted: Fri Feb 09, 2007 7:14 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Pondering wrote: |
We're going to use body counts as an idicator for debacle?
By that measure EVERY war fought by the US (to include the Revolution, Civil War, WWI and WWII) were debacles... |
That's not what I'm saying. I'm saying that if we shouldn't have gone into Somalia, and if we shouldn't have gone into Iraq, then from the point of view of U.S. soldiers wounded and killed, the Iraq war was a bigger mistake. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
RevJP
Moderator
Joined: 18 Apr 2003
Posts: 6817
Location: USA
|
| Posted: Fri Feb 09, 2007 7:48 am Post subject: |
|
|
No one said we shouldn't have gone to Somolia, we should have, but we should have gone with an intent to win and a plan to accomplish that intent.
If you care to look at the soldier in service/soldiers killed ratio you would get a much clearer understanding of which was a debacle and which was a standard combat situation. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Trinity1
Emperor of the World
Joined: 02 Apr 2006
Posts: 3111
|
| Posted: Fri Feb 09, 2007 1:44 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| RevJP wrote: | | If you care to look at the soldier in service/soldiers killed ratio you would get a much clearer understanding of which was a debacle and which was a standard combat situation. |
I think we are 4 years into this.. and about 3000 dead.
D-Day June 6, 1944... how many thousand dead in one day?
Civil War... Gettysburg... 50,000 dead in three days?
Vietnam... 55,000 dead.
WWII... 292,000
WWI...53,000 in just a few months
So, by any standard you are measuring here P... we seem to be doing pretty well. I think your issue is you just don't like Bush... and you hate Rummy. Your blind hatred for these two folks... three counting Cheney... is simply clouding your ability to make an objective assessment of our actions in Iraq.
I am interested to see what your response is to Aspen. Here you have a clear disregard for the request of the combat commander in theater… and the result is obvious. All of them Rangers would not have gotten killed had we had the Bradley’s to go in and extricate them. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
P1234567890
Emperor of the Universe
Joined: 11 Mar 2006
Posts: 6772
Location: Toronto, Canada
|
| Posted: Fri Feb 09, 2007 5:29 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| RevJP wrote: | | No one said we shouldn't have gone to Somolia, we should have, but we should have gone with an intent to win and a plan to accomplish that intent. |
You can say exactly the same thing about Iraq!
Or do you think that Rummy and Cheney's "They'll shower us with rose petals in the streets, so we don't need a long-term plan or occupation force." plan worked out properly? |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
P1234567890
Emperor of the Universe
Joined: 11 Mar 2006
Posts: 6772
Location: Toronto, Canada
|
| Posted: Fri Feb 09, 2007 5:34 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Trinity1 wrote: |
I am interested to see what your response is to Aspen. Here you have a clear disregard for the request of the combat commander in theater… and the result is obvious. |
And combat commanders in Iraq have repeatedly been asking for more men... enough to get the manpower up to what it needs to be in order to have an effective occupying army.
Were those requests granted?
There are a lot of parallels between Somalia and Iraq.
The one thing that all military debacles have in common is that in them, the leaders ignore Sun Tzu's first law of war: know your enemy.
Not following this fundamental law of war was America's big mistake in Vietnam, and exactly the same mistake was made again in Iraq. I don't know that much about Somalia, but I'm guessing that the same holds ture there. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Trinity1
Emperor of the World
Joined: 02 Apr 2006
Posts: 3111
|
| Posted: Fri Feb 09, 2007 8:35 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| P1234567890 wrote: | | And combat commanders in Iraq have repeatedly been asking for more men... enough to get the manpower up to what it needs to be in order to have an effective occupying army. |
Initially... the Chief of Staff (Shinseki) was. However, he was proved wrong when we walked into Baghdad 3 weeks later...
Since then... I have no clue to whom you are referring too...
| Quote: | There are a lot of parallels between Somalia and Iraq.
The one thing that all military debacles have in common is that in them, the leaders ignore Sun Tzu's first law of war: know your enemy. |
You may have a point here as before we invaded Iraq, the insurgency did not exist.... and you can't know someone if they don't exist....
So... Aspen refuses needed equipment that we had. Here... what? |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
P1234567890
Emperor of the Universe
Joined: 11 Mar 2006
Posts: 6772
Location: Toronto, Canada
|
| Posted: Fri Feb 09, 2007 8:53 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Trinity1 wrote: |
You may have a point here as before we invaded Iraq, the insurgency did not exist.... and you can't know someone if they don't exist....
|
And NOBODY could have predicted that disbanding the Iraqi military was going to produce a lot of REALLY ANGRY Sunnis with lots of military know-how, and probably a lot of knowledge about where a bunch of secret caches of weapons and munitions were buried...
| Trinity1 wrote: |
So... Aspen refuses needed equipment that we had. Here... what? |
Here we had a Defense Secretary who made colossal strategic mistakes in Iraq. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
P1234567890
Emperor of the Universe
Joined: 11 Mar 2006
Posts: 6772
Location: Toronto, Canada
|
| Posted: Fri Feb 09, 2007 8:54 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Trinity1 wrote: |
Since then... I have no clue to whom you are referring too...
|
Are you saying that the commanders in Iraq HAVEN'T been asking for more troops, when it is obvious TO EVERYONE that the American occupation force just isn't big enough? |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
knuckle
Young Wolf
Joined: 18 Sep 2006
Posts: 501
|
| Posted: Sat Feb 10, 2007 3:01 am Post subject: |
|
|
Hi All------
The real problem for GI Joe in Iraq is that the friendlies and the bad guys all look alike.No flags, no colored shirts,just a bunch of faces amongst the chaos.When we boil it all down the American soldier is trained to do two things,to kill people and break stuff,a job they do better than any other fighting force on the planet.The forces that are on the ground in Iraq today are more than adequate to DEAL with the enemy but SEPARATING him from the bystander ---- I don't know if more troops are gonna solve this.
much love----------knuckle |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Trinity1
Emperor of the World
Joined: 02 Apr 2006
Posts: 3111
|
| Posted: Sat Feb 10, 2007 10:07 am Post subject: |
|
|
| P1234567890 wrote: | | Are you saying that the commanders in Iraq HAVEN'T been asking for more troops, when it is obvious TO EVERYONE that the American occupation force just isn't big enough? |
It is obvious to whom P? If it were obvious to the commanders in Iraq they would ask for more troops... who in the military is asking... or has been asking for more troops where the request hasn't been granted?
This is more of the same unsubstantiated dogma you have been writing... if there are commanders there asking for more soldiers... who... when... and how many were they asking for? Cite. If they needed more, and it is obvious, who... of these commanders on the ground (you know... the ones who are actually there and not watching what CNN or the BBC decides you should see)... are asking for these soldiers? |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
RevJP
Moderator
Joined: 18 Apr 2003
Posts: 6817
Location: USA
|
| Posted: Sat Feb 10, 2007 10:08 am Post subject: |
|
|
Knuckle, respecfully that is the same situation we faced in Korea and Nam, and countless other skirmishes in the past.
Recognizing the enemy is only part of the problem, and not the most significant part.
The problem is when you have 50 square miles of area to cover, and enough troops to cover 30 square miles adequately and the enemy know this, they attack in the 20 square miles you do not have covered.
Now, throw into the equation the reduction of that coverage by 30% because that is how many troops are pulled out of the field to do the cooking, cleaning, and other logistics services (because we pulled the KBR contract because it was somehow 'evil' or 'illega'....)
Anyway, more troops would make a significant difference. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
FAQ 
Search 
Make a Donation 
Usergroups 
Contact
Register
Submit Articles 
Log in to check your private messages 
