Friday, October 20, 2006

We have to rethink our Iraq Strategy

News from Iraq this morning is that Muqtada Al-Sadr's Shiite militia has overrun a southern Iraqi city, destorying police stations in their siege. If you're a "stay-the-course" guy, you're thinking that we can just send the Marines in there and root these terrorists out. If you've been in the military, or you know anything at all about urban warfare, you know that we are likely to lose American lives in that hypothetical endeavor. Now I need you to ask yourself why it would be okay to have to explain to the family of a slain Marine that he died to re-take an obscure southern Iraqi city of absolutely zero strategic importance three years after a successful invasion of that country.

How can you justify American deaths in Iraq three years after the war? War should generate a profit- destroy your enemy's war-making ability, take your spoils and GO HOME!

Some people feel like talk of a withdrawl is a sign of weakness, and they would look like fools for changing their minds. I haven't changed mine- The invasion was awesome, but now we've ruined 100% of our advantage gained from it because our President gave in to political pressure and didn't seize the Iraqi oil fields like he promised (he just handed them over to OPEC), and now our soldiers are walking around with no objective, just waiting to be ambushed or drive over an IED because we have no strategy.

That's a lot of critisizm, but I do have an idea for how to stop the bleeding:

We pull our military presence out of all cities except the green zone in Baghdad, and station our soldier in our largest bases, where we construct runways, hangars, and barracks, if not equipped already. We need to concentrate our forces in areas that we can actually keep secure, maintaining just a handful of these super bases throughout the country. Has it been done before? Yes, in Germany, in the wake of World War II. The occupation went so poorly that we just built giant bases to shelter our soldiers. Rammstein AFB is one example that is highly functional even today.

The insurgency isn't going to quit until we leave, but the President won't let us leave until the insurgency quits. Sooner or later, we'll realize that we are doing to Iraq EXACTLY WHAT KING GEORGE DID TO US. Yeah, the British had a much better army, but we beat them because we believed in what we were doing, and it was our home. I think Muslims are all idiots, but if they believe in it then how are we going to set up our government on their turf when they don't want it?

13 comments:

B.L. Sabob: now "completely heterosexual" said...

We never should have been there in the first place. Now the entire nation and much of the world has to suffer for the mind-boggling stupid decisions of a handful of powermad sociopaths.

I'm just sorry that the politicians (and their families) along with the heads of all the corporations (and their families) aren't fighting and dying on the front lines of this debacle.

Wonder how many of the children of Halliburton and Bechtel executives have volunteered to help America "fight terrorism."

greencommunist said...

Like I have been saying all along. This war was not started to end, well end quickly ... it was started to continue for years and years so the weapons manufacturers and oil companies can continue to suck up our tax money and fill up their bank accounts.

Just like 'Nam ...

BigNewsDay said...

This has become a cluster fuck, and we need to figure out how we let our government lead us astray like this. This November, we will send a message to Bush & Co. that we do not appreciate them risking the lives of our soldiers for their profit.

greencommunist said...

We LET it happen? Shit ... "We" haven't had any choice in this country for decades. Follow the dollar man, follow the dollar. I hate to be such a pessimist ... and perhaps I am uber-pessimistic tonight ... but you know what's going to happen in November, we are going to get another "president" (and I use that term very loosely) who will make a great subordinate to the "powers that be". That's just all you can expect when you live in an empire.

B.L. Sabob: now "completely heterosexual" said...

"Its not who votes that counts, its who counts the votes>

The evidence is overwhelming that both the 2000 and 2004 presidential elections were stolen. And there's equally strong evidence that they are planning to do the same thing again. The only question that remains is, what will Americans do when they discover that once again massive amounts of poor an minorities were prevented from voting and many of those who did vote, did not get their votes counted due some bullshit called "spoilage?" Will we finally fight back, or will we sit back and take it up the asspipe, again?

BlackLabelAxe said...

I've read a lot about both elections, and I'm not so sure that there's any credible evidence that either one was stolen. Where should I go to look up information on the stolen election theory?

I'm not saying it isn't possible, but my gut tells me there's no way.

B.L. Sabob: now "completely heterosexual" said...

I've read a ton of things about the methods used to disenfranchise millions of Americans through bogus over roll purges, delivering faulty voting apparatus to poor and minority districts, having understaffed and poorly trained volunteers in said districts etc. I would suggest finding the articles by Robert Kennedy about Ken Blackwell's tactics in 04 and check out Greg Palast regarding purges and spoilage in Florida in 00. Also check out Black Box Voting for information about the discrepancies regarding electronic voting machines.

Bottom line is this: In 04, and perhaps 00, everytime the exit polling was wrong, the end result favored Bush. That is statistically impossible. Past elections have shown that exit polling is consistently reliable. what changed in the past 6 years?

B.L. Sabob: now "completely heterosexual" said...

make that "Voter roll purges"

B.L. Sabob: now "completely heterosexual" said...

http://www.gregpalast.com/the-great-florida-ex-con-gamernhow-the-felon-voter-purge-was-itself-felonious#more-998

http://www.gregpalast.com/index.php?tag=theft-of-presidency

http://www.rollingstone.com/news/story/10432334/was_the_2004_election_stolen

BigNewsDay said...

I've read the Kennedy article, an it is very disturbing. I think every American should at least read it and then make their own decision about the issue.

greencommunist said...

There is a very disturbing video on my blog about the 2000 presidential elections. It's the testimony of a software engineer hired to make the software that would rig an election. He was hired by senators to create it.

B.L. Sabob: now "completely heterosexual" said...

That's why Douche and Rover are so "Confident"

Lefty Metalhead said...

It looks like the GOP will pull some tricks again this election to subvert minority votes. However, this time the situation is different. Wingnut voters aren't as passionate as they were in 2000 and 2004. Many of them have lost faith in the GOP and the Bush administration. Furthermore, the left is angry and mobilized, which means Democrats are likely to pick up many seats on Congress, perhaps even regaining control. Swing voters, particularly libertarians, are leaning toward the Democratic side as a result of BushCo's failed policies, and the abundance of scandals among GOP leadership. Let's get a majority of Dems to pave the way for President Obama in 2008!