All Volunteer Military a Failure

I really think you should get a grip man.

Whinning? What kind of word is that? You got the beer goggles on again?

Why? Let's look at Iran, for example. What factors or human influences do you think could stop your president from invading Iran if he decides to do so? He is "the decider", after all.

It currently isn't rare for the US, which is bogged down in Baghdad.

What political pressure? The administration had a free hand in Iraq for the first 18 months, and even now it's getting from Congress everything it's asking for. The fact is that the administration never intended to send in overwhelming force because Rumsfeld wanted to prove his "transformation" doctrine, and the neocon crowd believed that the Iraqis would greet us with open arms and flowers.

Fallujah had been under control until Blackwater mishandled an ambush on some private contractors delivering dinnerware and caused the residents to riot.

What percentage of US deaths are being caused by IEDs?

We aren't winning. The insurgency has pulled back from Baghdad simply because we've concentrated more combat troops there, and they're waiting, elsewhere. If we really were winning, the administration wouldn't have recently changed the way it reports casualty data. And Gen. David Petraeus isn't the Matthew Ridgeway of Iraq -- he never served in combat until this war, and it seems that he failed in every one of his missions there and his successors had to correct matters.

Don't change the subject but answer seriously: Why did al Qaeda raise the standards for its recruits while the US military lowered them?

You tell me.

You're not winning because you are a loser.

Great answer. Welcome to the junior high school locker room, with your host, dbu.

I've been following this thread just for the hell of it, but your response has to be the most telling of any. You don't have a response, just a few meaningless one liners in a weak attempt to support a failed operation.

If you folks looked at this sorta objectively it is almost a mirror image of VN. They engage when they want, set IED's all over the place(booby traps), melt into the population when the pressure we apply rises. Same deal, only this time it is sand and not jungle. We are chasing our tails. What's the body count, 3800+, and no end in the near future. Whoever planned this cluster f*ck didn't read any history.

One liners is all that is needed. Why waste my valuable time writing long paragraphs why I think this trip is necessary as I've done in the past, long before you came along.

But they are less now than last spring. We are winning. To leave now would be a disaster. Even hillary admits it. She will be the democrat running for president that you will vote for in the next election. I see in todays news they are increasing the size of the largest AB in Afghanistan, so we will continue our presence in that area for a long time. I think that is very good thing to do. A long term commitment.

Why do you feel that I will vote for her? Because I think this deal in the desert is foolish? You can't seem to get hold of the fact that you are part of the smaller percentage that support this mess. I suppose before one of the zealots jumps in I should add that because one thinks this is foolish does not mean that one does not support the folks that are over there.

A long term commitment at what cost, for what return? These rag heads have turned this into a guerilla war. Russia who plays by no rules, those spetsnaz(sp)troops were friggin' brutal, had their hat handed to them trying win a guerilla war in Afghanistan. We play by all sorts of rules of engagement, no fire zones, request permission to return fire when your getting your ass shot off, all sort's of crazy stuff. You know what it takes to be on top of this type of conflict, it isn't pretty and we as a country won't allow the military to take off the gloves and get it done. Here's a flash for you, that isn't going to happen in our lifetime. Until that happens, we will continue to toss troops into a meat grinder.

Well, that might be true, but I'm in good company and what I believe to be the correct side. Just because an uninformed majority (the herd) thinks it's the wrong thing to do, that majority is not necessarily right.

We need to change some of those rules, yep. Shoot first then ask the questions later. Of course, you've seen what happens in situations like that when the democrats get hold of it, because of the partisan nature of this war they would raise holy hell. I want to see us out of there too, but to just pack up and leave would be courting disaster, this is pretty much agreed on with all sides and parties.

Too funny! What makes you think that the majority is uninformed and you are??

I had asked a question that you seemed to have missed. Let me try again. A long term commitment at what cost, for what return?? Also please explain the "disaster" we would be courting.

The disaster is that if we pull out, Iran will fill the void, take over control of Iraq and the entire middle East, controlling a large share of the worlds oil supply. That's a no-brainer.

Iran will eventually have the bomb. Then the real shit will start. Most likely Iraq shipped what they had to Iran in the early days of the war. Do you think Israel will allow Iran to control the Middle East? Do you think Israel will allow Iran to mfg the bomb?

If all the above comes to fruition you will finally understand why we should have been there.

You know this how??

Nope, do you?

Same answer, no. Do you?

If, if, if! So much supposition. You advocate that we continue to put people in there as we have been? You agree that the rules have to be changed, yet you would continue this no win guerilla war? For how long, forever? 'Cause that is how long it will take if it is fought as it has been.

Well duh, you asked, I provided an answer for ya.

This is a pretty well known fact Roy. Oil is still very much in need not only here in the U.S. but ALL over the Earth.

My opinion to both questions is NO, Israel will not allow Iran the bomb. If we don't do something about it Israel will. One thing is pretty sure, the U.N. a worthless organization, will do nothing and neither will France, GB or any other so called world power do anything. It will once again be up the the U.S., the most powerful nation on this planet to do the work of all the rest. That is the way it is.

IF is a mighty big word isn't it. I've always said we need to shoot first and ask questions later. If they want to play dirty, then we should be able to play dirty too. Only fair. If we are allowed to do what we need to do there won't be any question of who wins.

No, what you provided is a opinion to substantiate your reason for continueing this mess.

Okay, then let Israel.

Question above.

Question above.

Question above.

Again with the if's. Why not deal with things as they are, rather than the if this and if that.

How about answering the questions above. I'll help you find them.

You gave an opinion without having the facts to back it? In WWII, about 4% of US casualties were from explosives like mines and booby traps. In Vietnam it was about 10%, but in Iraq it's around 50-70%.

In Vietnam, didn't the locals know the telltale signs of the booby traps much better than the Americans did? Is the situation any different in Iraq?

You just summed up the neocon state of mind: always blame others for your mistakes, and never admit being wrong. You people and GW Bush are totally wrong and incompetent.

Is the children learning?

Your kind of thinking is what got us into the Iraq mess and allowed all the major mistakes happen.

How are we supposed to ever win in Iraq with just 130,000-200,000 GIs and no effective Iraqi military or police? Remember, GW Bush has never called for using a force bigger than that.

Nobody thought that Afghanistan would be anything but a long term commitment to nation building, and anybody with even half a brain has objected to GW Bush taking personnel out of Afghanistan and moving them to Iraq. However the topic here isn't Afghanistan but Iraq, where GW Bush expected us to be out in just six months -- that was over four years ago.