Iraq - Our Options

[MJDuncan1982]

I did not support the invasion of Iraq.

But such sentiments no longer matter.

There seems to me to be two possible directions that our country can take:

1) Stay, or

2) Pull out.

To stay, it seems that more troops are needed. It is my opinion that if we are going to assume that the mission can be accomplished, ~120,000 troops is not enough. The number needs to be increased to about 500,000. There is a job to be done...it's about time this country manned up and did the job - draft or no draft.

To pull out would probably destroy any hope of turning Iraq into a viable democracy. To do so would be a waste of the 2000+ soldiers that have died and the countless civilians that have died as well. However, without a greater commitment, it is not practical to stay.

This country needs to choose a side of the road. The middle will get us killed.

Opinions?

 

[Annie]

I did not support the invasion of Iraq.

But such sentiments no longer matter.

There seems to me to be two possible directions that our country can take:

1) Stay, or

2) Pull out.

To stay, it seems that more troops are needed. It is my opinion that if we are going to assume that the mission can be accomplished, ~120,000 troops is not enough. The number needs to be increased to about 500,000. There is a job to be done...it's about time this country manned up and did the job - draft or no draft.

To pull out would probably destroy any hope of turning Iraq into a viable democracy. To do so would be a waste of the 2000+ soldiers that have died and the countless civilians that have died as well. However, without a greater commitment, it is not practical to stay.

This country needs to choose a side of the road. The middle will get us killed.

Opinions?

Why 500k? Why are more US troops needed, when the generals on the ground are saying that the 30k increase in the past 2 months has been sufficient to get to the election in about 2 weeks. 30k should be gone by the first couple weeks in Jan., then a slow reduction in troops throughout the next 6 months, barring no changes from how things have been going the past 6 months or so. How do you know more?

 

[MJDuncan1982]

Our troops are having to play "whack the mole" - as far as I can tell. It's like having ten fingers but twelve holes to fill.

I admit that I cannot produce any evidence of this fact but it seems to me that if there were a sufficient amount of troops on the ground, the attacks against our troops would decrease.

I do not think that the level of troops that are on the ground is sufficient. Our troops should not have to "leap frog" from city to city in order to keep the preace.

 

[ekrem]

I did not support the invasion of Iraq.

But such sentiments no longer matter.

There seems to me to be two possible directions that our country can take:

1) Stay, or

2) Pull out.

To stay, it seems that more troops are needed. It is my opinion that if we are going to assume that the mission can be accomplished, ~120,000 troops is not enough. The number needs to be increased to about 500,000. There is a job to be done...it's about time this country manned up and did the job - draft or no draft.

To pull out would probably destroy any hope of turning Iraq into a viable democracy. To do so would be a waste of the 2000+ soldiers that have died and the countless civilians that have died as well. However, without a greater commitment, it is not practical to stay.

This country needs to choose a side of the road. The middle will get us killed.

Opinions?

500.000 is to much. But 300.000 is the right figure for securing the boarder.

 

[MJDuncan1982]

Which border?

Mexico or Iraq?

 

[Annie]

Our troops are having to play "whack the mole" - as far as I can tell. It's like having ten fingers but twelve holes to fill.

I admit that I cannot produce any evidence of this fact but it seems to me that if there were a sufficient amount of troops on the ground, the attacks against our troops would decrease.

I do not think that the level of troops that are on the ground is sufficient. Our troops should not have to "leap frog" from city to city in order to keep the preace.

So you pick a number out of the air and say, 'that's what American policy should be.' Ok...

 

[Annie]

500.000 is to much. But 300.000 is the right figure for securing the boarder.

Which border would that be? Saudi/Kuwait? Iran? Syria/Lebanon? Jordan?

 

[MJDuncan1982]

Well I'm not picking a number out of the air.

150,000 is not enough to me...as is apparent.

But as I said...I will look for evidence that 500,000 is a more practical number.

 

[Annie]

Well I'm not picking a number out of the air.

150,000 is not enough to me...as is apparent.

But as I said...I will look for evidence that 500,000 is a more practical number.

Don't bother, I think I'll continue to rely on the guys on the ground over there. Adding more than we need is not only impractical, wasteful, it's also dangerous.

 

[ekrem]

all boarders surrounding iraq. 150.000 securing, monitoring, preventing terrorists flow into iraq, and 150.000 soldiers fighting within the boarders.

 

[ekrem]

Don't bother, I think I'll continue to rely on the guys on the ground over there. Adding more than we need is not only impractical, wasteful, it's also dangerous.

but it would be the right sign. anfd the rightmessage to the world and the terrorists.

 

[Annie]

all boarders surrounding iraq. 150.000 securing, monitoring, preventing terrorists flow into iraq, and 150.000 soldiers fighting within the boarders.

Currently judged unnecessary. Do you Canavar have some military background?

 

[MJDuncan1982]

I agree with you.

Between the two options of maybe enough and maybe not enough...fuck the options and say more than enough.

 

[Annie]

I agree with you.

Between the two options of maybe enough and maybe not enough...fuck the options and say more than enough.

You really haven't a clue, do you? Just wanted to put something out there to make it look like 'they are blowing it...'

 

[ekrem]

Currently judged unnecessary. Do you Canavar have some military background?

In Turkey everyone has to attend military service of 18 Months, otherwise they cancel your Membership-passport of turkish citizen. I was in telecommunication-part and only got one time in an operation into the mountains in the southeast but not in the frontline and in no direct shooting operation.

your generals know it better than me, of course. i am only a person posting my personal view. and as such person i think, when terrorists are infiltrateing from the boarders than you have to secure the boarders as you cant build a wall like Israel did.

You are building up iraqi military, but its going to be US-oldiers who will fight the terrorists. And the earlier Iraq gets cleaned from terrorist the better for iraq, USA and the whole region. Ihave no view in US-Army inteelligence or plans, how could I. only saying my personal view.

 

[Annie]

In Turkey everyone has to attend military service of 18 Months, otherwise they cancel your Membership-passport of turkish citizen. I was in telecommunication-part and only got one time in an operation into the mountains in the southeast but not in the frontline and in no direct shooting operation.

your generals know it better than me, of course. i am only a person posting my personal view. and as such person i think, when terrorists are infiltrateing from the boarders than you have to secure the boarders as you cant build a wall like Israel did.

You are building up iraqi military, but its going to be US-oldiers who will fight the terrorists. And the earlier Iraq gets cleaned from terrorist the better for iraq, USA and the whole region. Ihave no view in US-Army inteelligence or plans, how could I. only saying my personal view.

The Iraqi soldiers and police are ALREADY fighting the terrorists. In quite a few areas, alone. That has allowed our troops to be redeployed more heavily in Falluja, Sunni Triangle in general, and now along Syrian border.

 

[ekrem]

The Iraqi soldiers and police are ALREADY fighting the terrorists. In quite a few areas, alone. That has allowed our troops to be redeployed more heavily in Falluja, Sunni Triangle in general, and now along Syrian border.

yes. i watch these days CNN as they are air special reports on Mid East. There i learned that US Military classifize "Operation-able-brigades" in Level-1 and Level-2 and soon. There they said, that Iraq army will operable in 2007 and beyond.
When i were fighting these terrorists i did not want to be backed my rear from Iraqi soldiers but from trained NATO-soldiers. US soldier is able fighting these terrorists not only from the will but also from the equipment. I do not want say US-Soldier is helpless there, but the picture not only showen in the media transports such a picture to me.

I think 150.000 soldiers are not sufficient and i do not understand why only 150.000 soldiers are there when you have a greater pool of soldiers to send in Iraq. I will not deny that security is progressing in the country, it is defineable from different views. But Anyway the base-situation looks to me very bad. I am also not an supporter of Vietnam-fantasies as these 2 battlegrounds and the whole thing in detail is different. But Viewing from outside to the situation in Iraq i think there has to be done much more. And my solution would be sending more troops in doing the job, killing all terrorists and send a strong message to everybody who watches American war in Iraq.

Training soldiers you can do paralell and afterwards, how US Military strategists think or the countries who contribute helping in training Iraqi soldiers. From time to time not solveing the situation in Iraq your anti-war demonstrators rise. So why not go in with a self-convinced, End-operation. Would it not ease Bushs position in inner-politics in USA with these demonstrators, too?

Such an operation would cost maybe the same amount of life of US-Soldiers, but the time-frame would change. And maybe quick-up this process and with the results of this the situation would be better in a quicker time for all participiants in Iraq, the region and in USA for Bush himself

 

[Annie]

yes. i watch these days CNN as they are air special reports on Mid East. There i learned that US Military classifize "Operation-able-brigades" in Level-1 and Level-2 and soon. There they said, that Iraq army will operable in 2007 and beyond.
When i were fighting these terrorists i did not want to be backed my rear from Iraqi soldiers but from trained NATO-soldiers. US soldier is able fighting these terrorists not only from the will but also from the equipment. I do not want say US-Soldier is helpless there, but the picture not only showen in the media transports such a picture to me.

I think 150.000 soldiers are not sufficient and i do not understand why only 150.000 soldiers are there when you have a greater pool of soldiers to send in Iraq. I will not deny that security is progressing in the country, it is defineable from different views. But Anyway the base-situation looks to me very bad. I am also not an supporter of Vietnam-fantasies as these 2 battlegrounds and the whole thing in detail is different. But Viewing from outside to the situation in Iraq i think there has to be done much more. And my solution would be sending more troops in doing the job, killing all terrorists and send a strong message to everybody who watches American war in Iraq.

Training soldiers you can do paralell and afterwards, how US Military strategists think or the countries who contribute helping in training Iraqi soldiers. From time to time not solveing the situation in Iraq your anti-war demonstrators rise. So why not go in with a self-convinced, End-operation. Would it not ease Bushs position in inner-politics in USA with these demonstrators, too?

Such an operation would cost maybe the same amount of life of US-Soldiers, but the time-frame would change. And maybe quick-up this process and with the results of this the situation would be better in a quicker time for all participiants in Iraq, the region and in USA for Bush himself

I have no experience at all, other than reading of wars as history major. However, I do believe you are seeing the face of the current war, not the past. I think there were problems in the beginning, your country's decision or rather indicision didn't help. But didn't stop anything either. My guess is you will be further amazed at what happens after 6 months from now, at least I truly hope so.

The days of massive armies and naval battles and perhaps even plane fights are nearing their end. Only my guess.

 

[ekrem]

I have no experience at all, other than reading of wars as history major. However, I do believe you are seeing the face of the current war, not the past. I think there were problems in the beginning, your country's decision or rather indicision didn't help. But didn't stop anything either. My guess is you will be further amazed at what happens after 6 months from now, at least I truly hope so.

The days of massive armies and naval battles and perhaps even plane fights are nearing their end. Only my guess.

yes you are right, this is partisan war which these terrorists choose and in city-streets it is more difficcult as the world watches to civilian colateral damage.

But, not assumeing that my thoought or theories are the right one, would a massive Troop-deployment into Iraq not show that Rumfsfelds plan was mistake from the beginning (150.000 Troops). Can there be such a political thinking behind this?
I am no friend of complot-theories either but, maybe it is in US interest not to solve the situation immediately :huh:

When your generals said something like this 30.000 Soldiers you mentioned before, USA must be contently with the situation.

 

[Annie]

yes you are right, this is partisan war which these terrorists choose and in city-streets it is more difficcult as the world watches to civilian colateral damage.

But, not assumeing that my thoought or theories are the right one, would a massive Troop-deployment into Iraq not show that Rumfsfelds plan was mistake from the beginning (150.000 Troops). Can there be such a political thinking behind this?
I am no friend of complot-theories either but, maybe it is in US interest not to solve the situation immediately :huh:

When your generals said something like this 30.000 Soldiers you mentioned before, USA must be contently with the situation.

Yup before each 'election' event, they brought in more troops, knowing the violence level would increase, which it has. So right now there are between 155k-175k from my understanding. Promptly after the 1st of the year, 30k should start leaving. Plans are with each subsequent rotation, a few more leave than come. If all goes well, the number of those leaving will keep going up, while those coming in will go down.