Counter Insurgency is not Total War. How about you stop ranting your Conventional War dogmas and read what Gen Abizaid said to the US Senate 2 weeks ago? If you had been around in WW2 you would be the clown ranting about how we had to fight it by recreating a WW 1 style army.
Different mission, different problems, different solutions. The Conventional Military dogmas you spend all your time screaming do not work for this sort of mission. Learn the differences. Quit just mindlessly shouting your slogans and try listening one time to what the people on the ground in Iraq are tell you. You can start with what Abizad told the US Senate two weeks ago. After that try examining the data here.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Iraqi_Security_Forces
http://icasualties.org/oif/
http://icasualties.org/oif/IraqiDeaths.aspx
Former infantryman, eh? Well you must've been an officer, and a West Pointer at that, because that's not what they teach at Benning. Or at least not back when I was still in. First of all, the nature of warfare never changes, regardless of how much we wish it would. To the wise soldier/leader, there's no differentiating between "conventional" war, and "counter insurgency", and there sure as hell is no "peacekeeping" or "nation building". You go in with more than you need to put a quick, bloody end to the war, taking as few casualties as possible while inflicting as many as possible, and to teach future enemies a lesson...don't mess with us. I would have been a clown calling for us to fight WW2 with the WW1 Army? Sheesh...I'd ask you to justify such a stupid comment, but instead I'll just let it stand on it's own (de)merits so everyone can see just how idiotic it is. As Limbaugh says, if someone insists on being stupid, stand back and let 'em go to it.
"Different mission, different problems, different solutions. The Conventional Military dogmas you spend all your time screaming do not work for this sort of mission. Learn the differences."
Wrong. There is but one military solution...kick the enemy's a** and show the world how futile it is to mess with us. You can try negotiations, diplomacy, sanctions, etc., but when the time comes to send my buddies into the mix, let slip the dogs of war and let the enemy learn his lesson.
So, since you're the teacher, why don't you demonstrate where the "winning the hearts and minds" approach to war has actually worked? Where...maybe Vietnam? How about Bosnia, Kosovo, Haiti, Somalia? How about the Brits in India? The French in the Congo? How about the UN "peacekeeping" missions in the Sanai and in Lebanon? Sorry, professor...the one and only way to win a war is to cream and demolish your enemy, beat him and his entire society into submission, and force him to toe your line. Or else.
" Quit just mindlessly shouting your slogans and try listening one time to what the people on the ground in Iraq are tell you."
Hehehehehe...you really are clueless, aren't you? I have friends "on the ground" as we speak. My best friend from high school is a Marine E-8, and was "on the ground" in Fallujah, forced to sit on his hands while Sadr's men rearmed and refortified their fighting positions, while we got suckered into "cease fire talks" that were nothing but a way to buy time. Come to think of it, kinda like the frst time we tried to "win the hearts and minds", and the Commies lured us into those BS Paris peace talks, but I digress.
Look Johnny Boy, you're a good loyal GOP party man, and a loyal Bush subject. I understand your loyalty to your president has given you tunnel vision, and whenever someone comes along and rocks your little boat (the SS Bushbot?), you get angry and lash out. It's okay...he'll be gone in two more years, and FReepers like me will quit talking about how much of a clueless moron he is (oaky, that's a bit harsh...the tax cuts were great, if only the Pubbies in Congress had the guts to make them permanent, which they don't). We'll have another RINO in the WH, or maybe a Rat to pick on.
Scouts Out! Cavalry Ho!
Scouts Out! Cavalry Ho!