Replies

Well said young scholar. Guess the opening vitriol stopped you from posting specifics. Pulling out doesn't mean not going back, except to a Democrat. As I see it, leave 9MM ammo and weapons on every street corner. Go back in one year and shoot the winner.

If people really support the troops, then express the need to blow the living ... er .. out of the Iranians; put the Chinese feet to the trade fires and generally give the terrorists the idea we are going to win. As it is now, these guys are pop-up targets. There is a NEED for change in strategy and definitive action. In war the more timid the approach the more casualties.

There is a NEED for change in strategy and definitive action. In war the more timid the approach the more casualties.

Our strategy from the beginning was to let the Iraqis handle their own security....with our help. It is based on a strategy recommended and implemented by the Englishman and soldier Lt.Col. T.E. Lawrence. He convinced the British to adopt his strategy (circa 1916) and which was brought to the big screen in the epic movie "Lawrence of Arabia".

As Rumsfeld said about two years ago..."it's going to be a long hard slog".

..watching the war in Iraq thru the lens of the MSM

They cannot defeat us militarily....but they can play with the psyche of our weak sisters and brothers safely ensconced in their Lazy Boys back home.

Our own casualties are, by historical standards, extremely low. But I do seem to sense a modification to our original strategy. Albeit unspoken. It's to let the Shia and Sunnis slaughter each other until exhaustion sets in. That may be the best approach.

As Margaret Thatcher once said..."this is no time to go wobbly".

This is especially true when we see all those fine young men and women voluntarily serving their country with great courage and distinction.

The least we can do is support them in their heroic effort from the safe confines of our Lazy Boys.

"If people really support the troops, then express the need to blow the living ... er .. out of the Iranians; put the Chinese feet to the trade fires and generally give the terrorists the idea we are going to win. As it is now, these guys are pop-up targets. There is a NEED for change in strategy and definitive action. In war the more timid the approach the more casualties."

Under your assumption that more timid fighting equals more casualties, we must have been very timid during WWII since we lost over 100,000 and in this war we have been there nearly twice as long and have lost less than 3,000.

Or maybe you were talking about the Korean war where we were there between 2 and 3 years and lost 65,000 versus this war where we have been there between 3 and 4 years and have lost less than 3,000.

In war the more timid the approach the more casualties.

Then I'd say we weren't very timid at all. About 3,000 KIAs in 3 years is nothing, More died in a single day June 6, 1944 in Normandy, and a bit later, (February 19-March 26, 1945) 6,825 Americans were killed taking Iwo Jima, in just 36 days. All this at a time when the total population of the US was much smaller.

You think we were "timid" then?

Just as proper cropping can a make a dozen people in a photograph look like a mob, proper "spin" can make a hiccup in a successful strategy look like it's a disaster.