Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

To: Eric in the Ozarks

I think there was the longest period when the Iraqis (case in point: the residents of Ramadi) just didn’t realise what the fanatics of Al-Queda were like.

During that period I’m not sure it would have been helpful having more troops around. Maybe it was better that people had the animal brutality of Al-Queda shoved in their faces, so that they could compare and contrast with the Coalition forces. After all the horror they went through few in Anbar province would want Al-Queda back.

Strictly armchair general here though. I’m ready to be contradicted. An immediate 1 to 10 ratio of troops to citizens (as in post-war Germany) obviously worked there.


23 posted on 10/18/2007 7:38:50 AM PDT by agere_contra (Do not confuse the wealth of nations with the wealth of government - FDT)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 18 | View Replies ]


To: agere_contra

‘zackly.


26 posted on 10/18/2007 7:45:59 AM PDT by Eric in the Ozarks (Go Hawks !)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 23 | View Replies ]

To: agere_contra

If you look at my “America’s Victories: Why the U.S. Wins Wars,” it’s pretty clear statistically why the “surge worked.” We had already SLAUGHTERED al-Qaeda in the previous three years. Instead of front-line guys, we are now fighting the 2d and 3d teamers, and many, many fewer of them.


50 posted on 10/18/2007 9:32:55 AM PDT by LS (CNN is the Amtrak of News)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 23 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson