Stay the course.
Someone had to say it…
By 2010 N. Korea will have nuked San Francisco, and we won’t care about Iraq any more.
I doubt we’ll have 140,000 troops in Iraq in four years. Whether it’s stable or unstable, by that time the US government will mostly extricated itself and tried to say that whatever happens is the Iraqis’ fault.
I still don’t believe that for a minute; as I said in post #7, we’ll be there for as long as the Republicans are in power, and probably longer. Most likely we’ll be there for decades.
Just in case the above quoted post needed further corroboration:
Iraq: Resistance to Occupation Not Just for Fighters
Try an exercise in empathy and mentally exchange places with these children and their elders. Would you feel any differently? Because I know I wouldn’t. It’s only human to feel that way and despite what some of you might think, that’s exactly what Iraqis are: human beings with feelings like yours or mine.
No kidding.
I specifically didn’t say zero troops, I understand they are building those bases for a reason. But unless the war suddenly becomes popular again, political reality will dictate that the bulk of the soldiers will not be there forever - and specifically I think they’ll be out in a few years.
The bases don’t strike me as significant
- soldiers build bases, and civilian contractors love the money
For the past few days the newspapers have been full of Britain’s senior general saying that our (the UK’s) presence in Iraq is simply adding to the problem.
Somehow I doubt that he was going out on a limb, Blair is on the way out and it is likely that his successor will want to ditch as much dirty laundry as possible.
Replacing UK troops in Basra with US troops would not exactly help matters, so I guess that there will probably be a staged withdrawel from Iraq within the next few months.
The BBC Worldwide Service has been running a ‘charm offensive’ about Iran for about a month, they are also opening up Farsi and Arabic television channels, so my guess is that they are aiming to defuse the situation - partition of Iraq does look possible.
The French are busily insulting Turkey, which I suspect is a proxy action on behalf of Germany, which makes me suspect that some form of Kurdistan will appear.
I would place my money on some form of three chunk partition dressed up as a federation, and would not be surprized if it happened pretty soon.
Meanwhile another lost cause is being prepared in Darfour, that should provide sufficient battlefield footage to keep the unwashed entertained.
Would the oil still be secure and flowing? If so, we weill still be there.If we can get it and leave the rest of the country to sort itself out ,we would.
-
We won’t lose any 12,000 lives in Iraq. Why would we lose over 9200 troops in the next 4 years, when we’ve ‘only’ lost <2800 in the first 3.6 years?
-
If we haven’t pulled out by 2010, we’ll be in the last throes of doing so. By the time we have a new President, it’ll be transparent even to Pubbies that there’s nothing helpful we can do there.
Drop it in the UN’s lap. Push for the partitioning of Iraq into three soverign states and send UN troops to enforce the new borders.
2010? Who the hell thinks you’ll be able to last till then?
US army concedes failure in Baghdad
It’s a lost war and the sooner The Make Their Own Reality crowd gets that through their thick skulls, so much the better.
OTOH, those of you that are faithful, pray that Dear Leader doesn’t start a conflict with Irar prior to his departure. Me, I’ll just keep my fingers crossed and hope Scott Ritter’s wrong for once:
Scott Ritter on "Target Iran: The Truth About the White House’s Plans for Regime Change”
Irar = combination of Iraq/Iran? Hmmmm.
But I actually meant IRAN
Who was it who said just last month “The safety of America depends on the outcome of the battle in the streets of Baghdad”?
Oh yes, President Bush in his 9/11 address.
Fortunately the odds are pretty good that he was lying again; otherwise we’d be DOOMED!
Indeed. And the fact that he isn’t going around the country, pleading with Young Republicans to enlist in the military, or proposing that we have a draft so we can drastically increase the number of American soldiers in Iraq, shows how totally and completely he’s bullshitting us. Even if we assume arguendo that pacifying Iraq is possible, it’s clear that our Army is much too small for the job.
Here’s a short list of tricks our Administration is using, to desperately make ends meet so we can maintain even our current troop strength in Iraq: we’ve made liberal use of stop-loss orders, routinely extended our troops’ tours of duty, worn out the National Guard, sent our elite training unit to Iraq, called up the Individual Ready Reserve, we’ve shifted troops from South Korea to Iraq, we’ve put nearly 12,000 sailors from the Navy on the ground in Iraq, along with a lesser number of Air Force troops. Enlarging the volunteer army is out: we’ve allowed violent criminals, gangbangers, skinheads and neo-Nazis, high school dropouts and persons of low I.Q. into the Army, as well as raising the maximum age for enlistment from 35 to 42, just to keep our troop strength where it is.
And that’s what we’re doing to keep our Army’s strength in Iraq where it is, when it clearly needs a massive boost in strength to have whatever remote chance there might be of restoring some sort of order to Iraq.
Crazy.
To be honest, I can’t see that doubling or tripling the number of troops in Iraq would make much difference.
Another checkpoint is another target.
With urban guerrilla warfare, where you are unsure who is friend and who is foe, one is pretty much stuffed.
The other aspect is that when the local population knows that you have ‘lost’ their allegiances are geared towards their future rulers.
The US can’t pull out because:
- the 9/11 terrorists would win
- Iraq has oil
- the WMD’s haven’t been found yet
- the US has already declared victory
- the Eye of Mordor will turn back to the US
- this is not like Vietnam
- The 9/11 terrorists are dead
- The ‘insurgents’ will learn how to sabotage oil
- The WMDs could be Pilt Down missiles - with a little creativity
- Iraq is a mess
- The Eye of Mordor might be looking at The Crack of Doom
- The Gooks are a different colour
Personally I reckon that Serbia, Iraq and Lebanon have demonstrated that conventional military techniques have their limitations, but are very unpleasant.
A dignified retreat on the basis that ‘we sure know how to f/ck up a state, but are not so good at re-assembling a broken egg’ could be spun into a decisive victory.
On the plus side, the UK army will shortly be running the heroin trade, and very few people fancy de-infrastructualization.