http://www.wtnh.com/Global/story.asp?S=2630273 And remembering that a key goal of Fallujah was to break the back of the resistance so that they wouldn't attack our Iraqi security force allies http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?file=/c/a/2004/11/30/MNGVNA3PDL1.DTL
Another Catastrophic Success! Yes! You don't fix a mercury spill by punching it. That only spreads the toxic waste around, and gives you a nasty rash and possibly mercury poisoning. (Ah, now which of the terminally clueless will claim I am denigrating our brave knuckles, do you think?)
i don't know if the insurgents planned it this way or not, but having our boys chase them around the entire goddamn country from one little pipsqueak village to another is a sure fire recipe for complete and utter disaster. whoever is the commander in chief of Iraq on the ground ought to be relieved of command (as they say) pronto and someone brought in who has at least a modicum of clueness about him (or her).
If he is doing such a terrible job then where is the uproar stateside? Where are the protests? We Americans don't seem to be giving as much a d!ck about Iraq and our mounting casualties and fatalities as every media outlet keeps telling me on a daily basis. Bush has our guys in action and being in action makes them look like they are doing something to prepare the way for elections. We are eatin' it up like warm cherry pie. Let's hope the last slice is on Jan. 30th, although I'd predict we're gonna be served up a few billion more warm cherry pies before it is all said and done.
Because of a horrible childhood accident, I have no head to my wee-wee, so whenever I look at internet porn, I wind up punching myself in the chin.
The answer is, "we don't know." A guess what?? We won't know for quite some time. "Bring them home" says Dave in his avatar--a standing invitation for the jihadits and the fascist Baathists to take back the country. And this time TOTALLY. Yep, there's a solution for you. Then of course, superdave is a super-surrenderer. A super-giver-upper. A super-runaway!!runaway man.
We really don't know....anything, about this un-f'ing-believable quagmire. Why are we there? WMD? Spreading Democracy? Fighting terrorists? Regime change? Holy f-ing Christ! This is beginning to make Viet Nam look like Grenada. Torture? Sure, we are doin it. Frittering away Iraqi Oil money? Yup. No bid contracts, mounting death tolls, no real plan, no exit strategy, deficit spending, looking away from the actual fronts, ignoring "homeland security".... Oh my Gawd. The emporer has no clothes.
Wow, some of you need to stop frequenting DU to get your news. Fallujah was an overwhelming success, breaking the backs of the terrorists. Zarqawi network appeals for help in first signals of defeat Friday, November 26, 2004 BAGHDAD — Sunni insurgents backing Abu Mussib Al Zarqawi have expressed alarm at the prospect of a defeat by the U.S.-led coalition in Iraq. An audio tape said to be from Al Zarqawi charged Muslim clerics with letting down the insurgency "because of your silence." On Wednesday, Al Zarqawi, with a $25 million bounty on his head, was the target of a major manhunt in the Sunni Triangle, Middle East Newsline reported. Iraqi military sources said Al Zarqawi was said to have been seen in an area south of Fallujah. Islamic sources said that for the first time in more than a year the Tawhid and Jihad group led by Al Zarqawi appears to have lost control over many of its insurgents in the Sunni Triangle. The sources said Iraqi and U.S. assaults on major insurgency strongholds in such cities as Baghdad, Fallujah, Mosul, Ramadi and Samara have resulted in heavy insurgency casualties and a break in the command and control structure.
So, we will just have those elections in Iraq in January and then hey, let freedom ring? Mission accomplished. Time to break out the Presidential yacht? Go stick your head back in the sand.
If there are elections in Iraq, and a shia dominated government emerges that is truly free to chart Iraq's course and policies without regard to American dicates, then I say all these battles won or lost would have one clear winner: Iran. A truly independent, shia dominated, Iraqi government would have close relations with Iran since most of their leaders were sheltered by Iran and have close ties to that country. Such a government would ask the US forces to leave the country (albeit in a deliberate pace), and would forge an alliance with Iran to help it quell any disturbances from other sectors and communities. As Iran has decent relations with Iraqi Kurds, despite efforts by the US and others to hurt that relationship, the only major group within Iraq that would be left seriously brooding would be the sunni Arabs. Those among them surviving these battles and having anything left to fight will be quickly put in their place, while the rest of the sunnis will prefer Iraqi shia government to American occupation. Will the US ever allow this to happen? No. Neither the US, nor its "democratic" allies like Saudi Arabia, would relish a shia dominated Iraqi government. I am sure the Israelis won't like that scenario either. As long as there is a pretense at least that the US will allow the Iraqis to pick an independent government, Iran and the Shias will not want to create too much trouble for the US. Just enough for Americans not to think much about other adventures in the region. But once the elections come and the Americans begin bulking on the ideas of "democracy" they have been supposedly promoting, what you will find is American forces left isolated in different pockets and regions, far from their supply lines which in the meantime will be cut, left in an untenable political and military situation. They will eventually have to leave, after suffering a lot more casualties. I am certainly not against democracy and freedom for Iraq and the Iraqis. The question is whether those trumpeting those slogans are ready for it?
Okay, from now on I'll get all my news from the World Tribune. Hey, here's what I learned: Rush Limbaugh credits World Tribune for breaking the story that Iraq had WMD and Al Qaeda links! That was back in June. You'd think someone woulda followed up on that. As Rush said at the time, "it confuses me why nobody is making a bigger deal of this." Probably just the drugs talking, though.
http://www.nytimes.com/2004/11/29/international/middleeast/29search.html?oref=login Read the whole thing. Bring them home.
And send every punk-ass demon nutcase on these boards that wants them in that situation. They can go.
Failure seems like a harsh assessment, but they are dead for no discerable reason. Are we looking for the imminent threat of WMD? Maybe we are fighting terrorism? Perhaps we are bringing democracy to the middle east. Oh wait, Sadam was a despot who needed to deposed. Who knows why we invaded Iraq, certainly the reason is a convenient and moving target. We do know that Sadam wasn't AQ, that a 'free' election in January would install an Iran clone of a government, and that we are in hock up to our eyeballs as a result. The world looks at us as the problem, not the solution. The soldiers, and especially the dead and injured have been pure and simply used by bush, Rummy and the rest. How, not why but how, to extricate ourselves is the question now. BTW, I see the troop count, 'boots on the ground' as Shinseki called it was increased today. One more thing GWB, Rummy, Wolfowitz et al were wrong about. Their kids aren't going though.