[oceanview]

the LARGE HEADLINE aside, we've been talking about this on 3 different threads today.

the consensus seems to be that it isn't needed, that we are picking these insurgents off in groups all the time. The media wants to make this sound like Normandy being stormed, its really 3 neighboorhoods in the city where the bad guys are clustered.

that's not to say their aren't some risks here, let's see what happens when these "patrols" start taking place.

[victoryatallcosts]

Like I said- they've got it right.

Frankly, we ought to simply blow the living shit out of the city as an example to others- but I doubt if that would find widespread approval.

[clintonh8r]

Marine sniper operations are having a lot of success and gunships are being used against concentrated or fortified targets. I really don't think this will last much longer. The press wants to give the impression that the war is being micro-managed.

[Wilhelm Tell]

The terrorists seem to only be effective when they "spray & pray" their Kalashnikovs at close range, score a lucky hit with an RPG, set up booby traps, or send in suicide bombers.

Hopefully we have lots of snipers in the area who can take out the bad guys with minimal exposure to themselves and minimal danger to the civilians. That and helicopter gunships striking target-rich areas. The civilians might get tired of the terrorists, who seem more adept at blowing up school busses than at killing "invaders" or providing public utilities. More intelligence might eventually trickle in, making it easier to target the bad guys. House to house fighting would nullify many of our advantages. Perhaps someone with military experience can tell me whether or not my evaluation of this situation is accurate. I'm not a general -- I don't even play on on T.V.

[spetznaz]

This is what i was aiming at OV on that other thread. The moment politicians (even ours) start getting involved in the day-2-day running of things the greater the probability actions shall be taken that shall just buy the others side time. And thus we'll be left with 2 options. Withdraw from Iraq (which will never happen unless we want our enemies to see us as weak). Or two: go back and retake the cities.

And retaking the cities after giving the enemy time to prepare will not lead us to defeat ....we will indeed win, but more American lives will be lost because politicians were trying to walk the most PC path.

[jaykay]

let's see what happens when these "patrols" start taking place.

I wouldn't want to be on any of those patrols, would you? This amounts to sacrificing lives to try to buy goodwill which will never come. Very sad. We aim to appease.

[ought-six]

"...that's not to say their aren't some risks here, let's see what happens when these 'patrols' start taking place."

I agree with you, but only to the extent we don't hold off on hitting the mosques and shrines that are being used by the Islamists to stock arms and munitions and to launch attacks against us. If we can hit the "holy places," then I agree with not going in as a fullscale offensive.