Why hasn't the US Army done a Fallujah on Mosul yet?

[kanicbird]

@elucidator

… everybody there hates our guts…

I am so sick and tired of this, I demand a cite that EVERYBODY (even) in Fallujah hates our guts.

[Jake_the_Plumber]

@kanicbird

I am so sick and tired of this, I demand a cite that EVERYBODY (even) in Fallujah hates our guts.

OK, OK. Everybody except Achmed Al-Jaziim, the little bugger.

[elucidator]

@kanicbird

I am so sick and tired of this, I demand a cite that EVERYBODY (even) in Fallujah hates our guts.

Wouldn’t you?

[John_Mace]

@elucidator

Don’t do that, OK, John. Whether you intend it or not, your words carry the implication that I am hopeful of a prospect of slaughter and misery simply because it would promote my partisan agenda. That’s really offensive. I’m going to assume that isn’t what you mean.

I doubt it, but just in case I will state for the record that you’re an honorable person and I would never even hint that you are hopeful of the prospect of slaughter. Anyone drawing that conclusion from my post is flat-out wrong. I just think your vision into the future is clouded by a desire to see Bush repuditated. That’s all.

Besides, I’m sure your interest in “playing” is not contingent on the roles of the players.

What moves me most to suspect a “get the Hell out of Baghdodge” scenario on the part of the Bushiviks is their insistance on an election, any election, if not now, yesterday. Its hard for me to accept that their urgency is based on anything more than self-interest, they want out! If they can’t get out with banners streaming and bands playing, they are perfectly willing to throw around a bunch of medals and head for the helicopters, so longs as they have some kind of plausible scenario to feed the folks back home. And you know as well as I do that they have a whole cadre of spinsters ready to spin a shit souffle into a tasty quiche, yum-yum! And that there are posters on this very board who would trumpet that as though it were the Word from Mt. Ararat.

Except that there is simply no reason to delay the elections. Do you honestly think things will be better six months from now? Two years is a long time to live in a country governed by your occupiers. The sooner the process gets going, the better. At any rate, we need only wait a few months to see if your prediction plays out.

[Jake_the_Plumber]

I’m kinda curious as to how anyone will argue the pro-invade-Mosul side. This seems to be a rather rare alignment of the debaters, with cmkeller’s OP being the only one that seems to have thought Fallujah went well and should be repeated on 10x scale.

Any devil’s advocates out there?

[Ryan_Liam]

@Jake the Plumber

I’m kinda curious as to how anyone will argue the pro-invade-Mosul side. This seems to be a rather rare alignment of the debaters, with cmkeller’s OP being the only one that seems to have thought Fallujah went well and should be repeated on 10x scale.

Any devil’s advocates out there?

Well am not for invading Mosul, just the strengthening and support of Iraqi forces within the city to somehow bring back order. Its the only way we can win back that city I’m afraid.

[elucidator]

@John Mace

I doubt it,…I just think your vision into the future is clouded by a desire to see Bush repuditated. That’s all…

Gee. You shouldn’t have. No, really.

…Except that there is simply no reason to delay the elections. Do you honestly think things will be better six months from now? Two years is a long time to live in a country governed by your occupiers. The sooner the process gets going, the better. At any rate, we need only wait a few months to see if your prediction plays out.

You misunderstand. I am not contending that the elections should be postponed, I also see no reason for optimism. My analysis of the situation leads me to suspect that the Bushiviks will take the first thing smoking. Witness Rummy’s preparatory statements, about how they know it won’t be perfect, but damn near anything will do. They are intensely motivated that the elections go forward on schedule. That motivation might be due entirely to their deep and heartfelt committment to democracy for the Iraqi people. It might.

But because the Bushiviks are full of shit, doesn’t make postponing the election a good idea, nor a bad one. Frankly, I hardly think it matters. At any rate, what you failed to grasp: I’m not advocating postponing or not postponing.

And I wouldn’t call it a prediction by any stretch. Our access to facts is paltry at most, the amount you and I don’t know would fill volumes.

Perhaps we will meet in another venue, some time, where we can more openly share our insights into one another’s character.

[John_Mace]

@elucidator

You misunderstand. I am not contending that the elections should be postponed, I also see no reason for optimism. My analysis of the situation leads me to suspect that the Bushiviks will take the first thing smoking. Witness Rummy’s preparatory statements, about how they know it won’t be perfect, but damn near anything will do. They are intensely motivated that the elections go forward on schedule. That motivation might be due entirely to their deep and heartfelt committment to democracy for the Iraqi people. It might.

But because the Bushiviks are full of shit, doesn’t make postponing the election a good idea, nor a bad one. Frankly, I hardly think it matters. At any rate, what you failed to grasp: I’m not advocating postponing or not postponing.

And I never said you were advocating it. My question above was simply to point out that wanting, even insisting, that the elections go forward is a very reasonable position to hold. Bush is pushing them to be held on time because it would be **worse **to delay them.

I wouldn’t call it a prediction by any stretch. Our access to facts is paltry at most, the amount you and I don’t know would fill volumes.

Agreed.

Perhaps we will meet in another venue, some time, where we can more openly share our insights into one another’s character.

Can’t say that the exchange in either direction would be of much interest to me.

[RTFirefly]

@John Mace

Sounds like a prediction. Either of you guys want to place a little wager on that scenario coming to pass?

The elections, flawed as they will be, are going to happen. There’s no point in postponing them-- that’ll only make matters worse. And the elected government might ask for more control over the activities of US troops, but they aren’t going to ask us to leave.

They are. The only question, really, is the timeframe: will they want us out of their cities immediately, and out of the country in three months, or will they want us out of their cities in six months, and out of the country in two years?

The Shi’ite slate that wins won’t want to be regarded as ‘collaborators’.

I’m always good for a gentlemanly wager. My email’s in the profile, if you’d prefer to work out the details of a wager outside of the thread.

A full blown civil war is a real possibility in Iraq, some years down the road. But the US troops aren’t pulling out anytime soon. Even if you base your whole argument on the Republicans wanting save their political hides, your scenario would be MORE damaging to them than our staying in Iraq for the duration.

The most damaging scenario would be to disregard the orders of the sovereign government of Iraq to leave, and continue to see our soldiers get killed and maimed anyway, and continue to see the security situation go downhill, and eventually have to leave anyway, with our military in the worst shape it’s been in since before Grenada. And THEN watch the civil war explode after we’re gone, since we’re about the only thing most Arab Iraqis can agree on.

And civil war: the only question in my mind is, will it become a full-fledged conflagration within three months of our departure, or will it take up to a year? The Shi’ites have most of the population, but the Sunnis are both much better armed, and much better fighters, not to mention they’ve been practicing on our troops. I’m betting on them to come out slugging. Betting window’s open.