Replies

In your plan, you've got 1 division going to Syria's border (along with a fresh division from the States), one to Iran's border and one to Saudi's border. Since we only have the following forces recently deployed in Iraq, or on the way:

1st Marine Division
1st INF Division: deploy Iraq 3/2004 +plus NG Bde (from Vilseck, Ger.)
1st CAV Division: deploy Iraq 5/2004 (relieve 1st Armored Div., 2nd ACR) (from Ft Hood, TX)

And these Brigade-sized units:

82nd Airborne Div 1st Bde: deploy Iraq 1/2004 (4-6 month deployment)
25th Inf Div: 2nd Bde Strykers deploy Iraq 1-2/2004
2d INF Div: 3rd Bde Strykers deploy Iraq 3-4/204 (to Mosul)

I think we're too light to do something like you've outlined, unless Iraq gets REAL peaceful real soon.

Here are the units that are leaving Iraq:

1st Armor Div: Iraq Return U.S. 4/2004 Relieved by 1st CAV
4th Inf Div: Iraq Return U.S. 4/2004 relieved by 1st INF
2d ACR: Iraq Return U.S. 3-4/2004 relieved by 1st CAV
3d ACR: Iraq. Return U.S. 3-4/2004 relieved by Strykers
173d Airborne Brigade: Iraq Return Italy 4/2004

Not sure which units might be kept in Iraq a little longer to deal with this uprising. I'm pretty sure NONE of them will be kept there to be placed on the borders of Iraq's neighbors as a threat to them. "No (NEW) war in '04" seems to be Karl Rove's goal. Could the Iranians and Syrians be taking advantage of that? Probably.

>> I think we're too light to do something like you've outlined, unless Iraq gets REAL peaceful real soon.

I was getting to long winded to convey the complete idea in the last post. Iraq is going to get REAL peaceful, after we get REAL violent. Moving to the borders would occur at the earliest, after the Nov. elections.

As for the threat to the Saudi's and Iranians, it is meant to only be a threat initially. Syria is going to serve as the example. Initially two division poised as a threat. The purpose here is to give them one last chance (knowing that will not work), to ratchet up the rhetoric, and garner American popular support for the effort. In other words, it is just enough to start a war.

As for troop deployments and units leaving Iraq, this would have to be factored into the play. I just want enough to start the war. Ground troops will not be needed initially, and over time, their numbers will rise. One primary purpose of the troops on the borders of Syria and Iran is to isolate Iraq. Movement between Iraq, Syria and Iran will be eliminated. Thinking of this, it makes sense to do the same in Afgahnistan eventually to put more pressure on Iran.

Our aircraft carriers has to be turned around, trained, and then deployed to the Med. Munnitions need to be move into Iraq to support air and ground assault. I think in the case of Syria, the shock and awe as we performed in Iraq is not adequate. We should utilize many more non-smart weapons. That does not exclude the smart weapons for when we truely need to take out targets with percision. The 'dumb' weapons are used to strike fear in Syrians. They will submit to the US, not Islam. This is achieved through extreme violence. When ten times the amount of dumb bombs are used when compared to smart bombs, that violence seems much more real to the people of Syria. I have have visions of Dresden in mind. Based on intelligence there would be zero targets that are excluded. That would include schools, hospitals, and mosques. Using Iraq as an example, these are the exact places where weapons were stored, and terror is rallied. The air campaign will be long. The Syria will be cut off from the rest of the world, and starved out. All electricity, water, and food supplies will be immediately destroyed. This will break the back of terror in Syria and totally destroy the will of the Syrian people.

I must make this completely clear. The root of the problem is not the terrorists. The root of the problem is not the type of weapons terrorist use (airplanes crashed into buidings, roadside bombs, chemical weapons as recently discovered in the UK, or any type of WMD.) This idea that the type of weapons being used actually change the problem is hideous. It's like saying an M-16 is an assult weapon and needs to banned. But it is okay to buy an AR-15, or semi-auto shot gun used for hunting. All of those weapons can be equally deadly if used in appropriate circumstances, and many other weapons can be improvised. It is not the weapon is what is behind the weapon - any weapon.

What is behind the weapon are terrorists and gangs of thugs. And those terrorists and gangs of thugs are supported by the people of these countries. The people of these countries are told to support the terrorists and thugs by the mosques. The people who sit on the sidelines and do nothing are just as responsible for letting this occur in their countries. Their governments are just as responsible for supporting in some cases and ignoring in other cases. The root of the problem is Islam. EVERY mosque in Baghdad today was calling for Jihad against America. That was reported in a AP wire report. This is the source of the problem. We need to make these people submit not to Islam, but submit to America.

The reason why Syria is chosen as the first target is that they are an easier target to crumble, and there is no signficant movement in Syria to change their support for terrorism. Iran on the other hand a much more difficult traget to take on, and there are protest daily in the streets of Iran.

What thas said, Iran is next if they do not change their ways. And we will keep on expanding the fight until it is over. This sounds like an expensive endevour and would require signficant amount of troops. But I have no intention of rebuilding countries. I have no intention of occupying countries. These countries will be reduced to a 7th century economy so they can be closer to Mohammad. We will drain these countries dry of natural resources. Once done, we are out of there.

Next on the list is Saudi and Egypt. And once Syria is complete, Lebanon would be too. Egypt is rarely mentioned in the war on terror, but they have the same problems in being convinced that they need to change their ways. Yesterday for example, another tunnel between Epypt and the Gaza Strip was discovered. This tunnel was used to send bombs and supplies to terrorists in Gaza. The Egyptian government does nothing about this. Our relationship with Egypt is based on the dogma of the cold war, it needs to be changed to be based on the War on Terror.

The Dogma for the War on Terror is simple. People and nations that proven their support for terror and lack of action towards terror that are not worthy of living in the the 21st century. You know have the privledge to live in the 7th century, just like Mohammand. You will submit to America, not to Islam. Perhaps in several hundred years they will be worthy of being in the community of nations.