[Dilbert56]

I saw the interview and Col. Hunt didn't say it was the Al QaQaa ammo that was being used on our troops. He was referring to a DOD estimate that Iraq had 1,000,000 tons of ammo and we had only captured/destroyed 600K. The rest was available to the insurgents from ammo dumps or on the black market.

Issue: One of the facts that emerged from this ammo discussion is that there are 10,000 ammo dumps in Iraq. We keep hearing there weren't enough troops sent in to guard them all. The Al QaQaa facility is one of them and it would take hundreds of soldiers to guard. It goes on for miles and miles.

Question: If it takes an average of 100 soldiers to guard an ammo dump round the clock, doesn't that mean we would have needed 100 X 10,000 troops? That's a million soldiers - clearly impossible.

IMHO, we're being bombarded with a pair of fallacies:

1. That it's possible to address every contingency in a war, and
2. That you shouldn't prosecute a war until you have addressed every contingency.

[VOA]

The Al QaQaa facility is one of them and it would take hundreds of soldiers to guard.
It goes on for miles and miles.

The place covers about the same area as Manhattan Island.
At least I think that's what I heard from an interview with Bernard Kerrick (sp?),
the former New York City Police Commissioner who's been in Iraq working for
the guvmint.

[ml1954]

IMHO, we're being bombarded with a pair of fallacies:

1. That it's possible to address every contingency in a war, and

2. That you shouldn't prosecute a war until you have addressed every contingency.

Well said. I guess that's why he's Colonel Hunt and not General Hunt.

[Pirate21]

IMHO, we're being bombarded with a pair of fallacies:
1. That it's possible to address every contingency in a war, and
2. That you shouldn't prosecute a war until you have addressed every contingency.

Touche!