[LS]

Exactly the opposite has happened. At Karbala and Najaf, restraint in attacking "the city" combined with surgical slaughter of the bad guys has utterly decimated the enemy fighters.

I'm all for destroying a city if that's absolutely necessary, remembering that every one of those . . . what? 200,000 people has relatives who probably were not anti-American and almost CERTAINLY were not violent until you kill their relatives. Now you've just added 200,000 more "insurgents" to the ranks, rather than thinning them by 2-3,000. I think this way is better, and I trust the officers.

[TomasUSMC]

You say what the left wing says "relatives who probably were not anti-American and almost CERTAINLY were not violent until you kill their relatives."

---

If we killed their relatives it is because they were shooting at US!

Let me explain something to those on the left who use this weak argument.

IF We wanted to Kill Iraqi Relatives, all we would have to do is:

Open the Laptop

Click on the DELETE COUNTRY ICON (conveniently located on the desktop)

Scroll down to IRAQ

HIT ENTER

Puff, lots of killed relatives

[ASA Vet]

utterly decimated

Complete, absolute, total slaughter of 10% of the bad guys?

[Uncle Miltie]

"At Karbala and Najaf, restraint in attacking "the city" combined with surgical slaughter of the bad guys has utterly decimated the enemy fighters."

Bzactly. Which strategy was not used in Fallujah, leaving the wackos with the inspiration of "victory."