This wouldn’t be happening if we had won the war by now. It’s gone on longer than our land-based involvement in WWII’s European theatre.
In part this is because unlike now we didn’t have a media complicit in American defeat in WWII. There’s no question that the media have a significant effect on the rules of engagement.
In the European theatre, we had the ability to fire bomb cities and civilian casualties weren’t counted. When Germany surrendered, there weren’t too many buildings still standing in any of their cities. If we used those rules of engagement, Iraq would be nothing more than a sandy field of ruins and the war would have ended six months or earlier after we went in.
Ah... and how would one go about making an ideiology surrender? WWII ended in Europe with the surrender of a nation- Germany.
WWII ended with another nation finally surrendering. Japan.
Iran, Iraq, Afghanistan, UAE, Saudi Arabia, Syria, Turkey, Pakistan, Kazikistan, (all the ‘stans for that matter), Indonesia, India, much of Europe, parts of Russia, South America, and even the good ol’ USA have the enemy within their borders. But none of them have a “home” aside from their fanatical faith.
And aside from that, this war began long before 2001. “...to the shores of Tripoli...”
This is the single longest war we have ever been in. It has been with us since the dawn of the West. the Global War on Terror is an accurate name, but any dates on it should be labeled “Global Capaign on Terror.” That’s all this is right now. A campaign in the middle of a generations old war.
We won the war in 21 days. Unlike WWII the terrorists have no leaders to surrender so they keep fighting and hiding. Thanks for your patience.
PRay for W and Our Freedom Fighters
“This wouldn’t be happening if we had won the war by now. It’s gone on longer than our land-based involvement in WWII’s European theatre.”
Don’t you think that it’s entirely possible that without the “efforts” (to undercut OUR TROOPS while at the same time aiding, abetting and encouraging the terrorits)of Reid, Kennedy, Pelosi, Murtha, Durbin, Schumer (just to name a few) and their fellow traitors in the msm, that (1) the number of our soldiers that have been killed or maimed in Iraq would be significantly lower and (2) that the terrorists in Iraq would have been soundly defeated by now?
I think that in both cases the answer is a resounding YES!
And it will go on as long as the worldwide media continues to portray it as an active "war". We're probably fighting only a few thousand jihadis financed by a few million bucks from Syria, Iran and Bin Laden's friends. They can keep this up forever.
The "war" will only be won when the Democrats surrender to George Bush and drop the war as a political issue, and the Democrats media stops putting car bomb stories on the front pages. Then the jihadis will stop, because their war is not to defeat us in battle, but to get on the front pages long enough to enable the leftists to defeat America, just as they did in Vietnam.
Look at Israel. They've got one of the best armies in the world, and a populace trained and armed, and yet still the Palestinians can raise as much hell as they want, whenever they want, for as long as they want.
This is a political battle, and whatever happens on the ground in Iraq is irrelevant, except to the extent it can be turned into a political issue here in the US.
The war will be over just as soon as the American people decide it's over. Whether we "win" it, or "lose" it, depends on which political party wins the issue, not what happens in Iraq.
Saddam is gone. We "won", years ago. All the rest is politics.
I always think it’s a bit sad when I read posts like yours on FreeRepublic. In the old days, when this forum was first formed and became popular, it attracted the best and the brightest minds. Now if you want to see how far it’s fallen, all anyone has to do is read your post.
This is a different type of war being fought than our nation has ever fought. The stakes are much higher than they have ever been..our long term survival. Conventional methods of fighting do not apply and a different mindset has to be employed.
We've lost about 1% the men as we did in WWII’s European theater.
What is the point here?
If WWII went on another year or two then we should have just QUIT?
Or if the Iraq war was over in LESS time than WWII it would ONLY THEN have been a noble endeavor?
Over 10 million civilians were drafted to fight that war when our population was half of what it is now.
We have been fighting a TINY war with very few troops. We lost 6,000 in the first three days of D-Day alone. We haven’t even lost close to that in almost six years of war with terrorists. Each loss is tragic, but we are fighting the most successful military campaign in history. The DemocRATS just don’t want to see that because defeat serves them and the terrorists better.
Apples to oranges. You are chanting the ignorant talking points of Murtha, Kerry, Reid, Pelosi, and the other guy who wants just what they do, Usama Bin Laden.
“This wouldn’t be happening if we had won the war by now. It’s gone on longer than our land-based involvement in WWII’s European theatre.”
Yes, it would. It has nothing to with the length of the war, since we are still in the Kosovo/Bosnia engagement that was supposed to last only a year according to President Clinton. The current tactics of the Democrats are only happening because a Republican president is in office. They would never claim defeat if it were them.