Evaluating Iraq

Makalakumu

Gonzo Karate Apocalypse
MT Mentor
Joined
Oct 30, 2003
Messages
13,887
Reaction score
232
Location
Hawaii
How many casualties are too many casualties? 50 our guys dead this week and counting...I haven't seen to many stats on iraqi dead, but I would imagine that with our soldiers training and equipment, the number is at least 10 times higher. In other wars this stat would be seen as very light indeed. Yet, is Iraq comparable to other wars in which our country has been involved? When does the war in Iraq become a sickness that the US must amputate? Is there any cure for Iraq?

upnorthkyosa
 
M

MisterMike

Guest
The cure for Iraq would be to fast-forward evolution about 10,000 years. These people are primitives and cannot live in a democracy.

We're trying to force on them what they cannot understand or adapt into their lifestyles.

Killing off the remaining Bathists and Saddam loyalist and other foreign supporters who have crossed the border seems to be the only answer for now. Then leave them the keys and get out.

I await the responses in support of how a multi-national force would have been better treated by the Iraqi's...
 

Bob Hubbard

Retired
MT Mentor
Founding Member
Lifetime Supporting Member
MTS Alumni
Joined
Aug 4, 2001
Messages
47,249
Reaction score
767
Location
Land of the Free
To date, there have been 648 deaths and an official tally of 3,500 wounded since combat begain. There is an unofficial tally of 7,000-10,000 wounded.

(source: http://www.antiwar.com/casualties/)

Historically speaking, these numbers are low.

The invasion of Sicily for example cost well over 22,000 casulties on the Allied side. (The Axis lost over 165,000)

More recently, the British Falkland war which only lasted 72 days had 240 KIA (wounded count not listed)
(Souce: http://www.martialtalk.com/forum/showthread.php?t=6909)

5,000-10,000 Iraqi civilians are reported to have been killed. Iraqi military loses are in the 4,800-6,400 range.

Some are comparing the Iraq war with Vietnam. While I disagree with some of the political concepts in those comparisons, the tactical part is sound.
Iraq like Vietnam was a foriegn nation, were we were fighting against ages old concepts and a people who would willingly spend life to inflict damage on their enemies.
The enemy knows the terrain better than we do.

This counter-strike was expected, but it was hoped it wouldn't appear until after the transition was complete. The fighting is house to house, through cramped neighborhoods, the layout well known to the enemy, not well known to us.

Any expert on military operations will tell you that urban fighting is one of the worst enviroments to fight in. Collateral damage is high, and there are constraint on our troops that the enemy doesn't have. They are hiding in sacred places where if we shoot back, we are accused of 'defiling a holy place', and the bad PR adds more fighters to the enemys camp. The enemy has no problem with hiding behind women and children and firing, using suicide bombers, and rigging the wounded to explode. There are rules of engagement that most nations subscribe to. This enemy does not.

In plain words, its a very sucky situation.

Now, I'm of the camp that says we shouldn't have gone in there in the first place. That argument doesn't need to be re-debated. Dead horse, we're there now. Thats what counts.

So, getting out.
We can't leave until there is a stable government in place.
We can't leave while there is an armed uprising of a few thousand fanatics, especially when they have retaken several cities.
We can't leave while the country can't protect itself.

Leaving now would turn into a civil war, with possible other nations grabbing for their own pieces of the pie. Iraw, Syria, and Kuwait would love to push those borders back a bit...and don't doubt Turkey wouldn't want to drop the hammer on the Kurds as well.

The exit strategy is clear.
-Regain control of the areas currently in rebellion
-Continue the transition of power back to the Iraqis
-Continue to rebuild the infrastructure to allow self-sufficiency
-Protect the borders until such time as that duty can be returned to a functional Iraqi Army.

The timeframe for most of that is later this year. That may be ajusted depending on how long pascification takes.

Expect at least another 100-200 American KIA before then.

For a military campaign, 1,000 deaths is a small number.
But each one robs us of one of our brightest, and is therefore too much.
It must however be done so that the job is done right.
Let us hope it is done with minimal future losses as well.

-Peace.
 

theletch1

Grandmaster
MTS Alumni
Joined
Jan 21, 2003
Messages
8,073
Reaction score
170
Location
79 Wistful Vista
Just to add a little fuel to the fire here... How many of the "fanatics" do you think are Syrian or Iranian regulars in civilian clothing?
 
OP
Makalakumu

Makalakumu

Gonzo Karate Apocalypse
MT Mentor
Joined
Oct 30, 2003
Messages
13,887
Reaction score
232
Location
Hawaii
Does anyone see Iraq as a jumping off point for further conquest? The building of a bunch of military bases in Iraq seems a bit suspect. Also, I've heard it bantered about that the US would like to pull much of its strength out of Saudi Arabia and put it into a country that has a more democratic government. Has anyone else heard this?
 
OP
Makalakumu

Makalakumu

Gonzo Karate Apocalypse
MT Mentor
Joined
Oct 30, 2003
Messages
13,887
Reaction score
232
Location
Hawaii
MisterMike said:
The cure for Iraq would be to fast-forward evolution about 10,000 years. These people are primitives and cannot live in a democracy...

It sounds like the Iraqis don't want democracy. At least not in a western sense. The shia majority want a theocracy - which is in line with the demands of their religion and the teachings of the Koran. Sure, if we kill enough people we can force democracy on them, but when does that killing cross the line into a crusade-genocide? Think about it, you are advocating a pogrom of Kahnish proportions. Is that the only way we can acheive our goals? What if the hearts and minds of all the people in Iraq are bent on Islam?
 

Tgace

Grandmaster
Joined
Jul 31, 2003
Messages
7,766
Reaction score
409
Kaith Rustaz said:
For a military campaign, 1,000 deaths is a small number.
But each one robs us of one of our brightest, and is therefore too much.
It must however be done so that the job is done right.
Let us hope it is done with minimal future losses as well.

-Peace.
Agreed...historically single battles could cost 1,000+casulties. With the recent attitude towards casulty lists, I believe our current generation would have pulled out of WWII after D-Day. To the question "how many are too many?" I would ask "How few do you expect?" Every death is a tragedy, but thats how this busniess is conducted.
 

Bob Hubbard

Retired
MT Mentor
Founding Member
Lifetime Supporting Member
MTS Alumni
Joined
Aug 4, 2001
Messages
47,249
Reaction score
767
Location
Land of the Free
The majority of Iraq wants to live peacefully. The areas currently under conflict are also the main hotbeds of Saddams powerbase. It is a combination of die-hards, those with blood on their hands, some religious fanatics, some criminal groups and numerous outside fighters who are causing the problems now ongoing.

There are a ton of weapons floating around there. To use the old west comparision might be apt, as everyone seems to have a gun, and most aren't afraid to use it. We are actively working to undo not just decades of brainwashing, but centuries of ideas. The average Iraqi has heard of this democracy thing, but doesn't believe it. They look to their familiy and tribe first. The 'nation' idea is outside many of their concepts.

While the news reports these events, they also fail to report the other side of the story, since peace is never front page news.
There have been improvements in health care, moderination of electrical systems, and water treatment, as well as repairs to the oil production systems. Aid levels continue to rise, and commerce is on a steady improvement. New businesses are opening daily, and the people are slowly realizing that they now have choices.

This improvement is slowed by the ongoing rebellion, which while doomed to failure, will still be costly to defeat.

The country is at a crossroads, and it will take time to finish things. Americans are too damned impatient. The Japanese can take 8 hours to make tea....an American complains his microwave is too slow in that minute and a half it takes.

Patience.
It takes time to repair, heal and grow.
 

Tgace

Grandmaster
Joined
Jul 31, 2003
Messages
7,766
Reaction score
409
Kaith Rustaz said:
The majority of Iraq wants to live peacefully. The areas currently under conflict are also the main hotbeds of Saddams powerbase. It is a combination of die-hards, those with blood on their hands, some religious fanatics, some criminal groups and numerous outside fighters who are causing the problems now ongoing.

There are a ton of weapons floating around there. To use the old west comparision might be apt, as everyone seems to have a gun, and most aren't afraid to use it. We are actively working to undo not just decades of brainwashing, but centuries of ideas. The average Iraqi has heard of this democracy thing, but doesn't believe it. They look to their familiy and tribe first. The 'nation' idea is outside many of their concepts.

While the news reports these events, they also fail to report the other side of the story, since peace is never front page news.
There have been improvements in health care, moderination of electrical systems, and water treatment, as well as repairs to the oil production systems. Aid levels continue to rise, and commerce is on a steady improvement. New businesses are opening daily, and the people are slowly realizing that they now have choices.

This improvement is slowed by the ongoing rebellion, which while doomed to failure, will still be costly to defeat.

The country is at a crossroads, and it will take time to finish things. Americans are too damned impatient. The Japanese can take 8 hours to make tea....an American complains his microwave is too slow in that minute and a half it takes.

Patience.
It takes time to repair, heal and grow.
Hey, whats going on here?? Were in total agreement....again.
icon10.gif
 

heretic888

Senior Master
Joined
Oct 25, 2002
Messages
2,723
Reaction score
60
The cure for Iraq would be to fast-forward evolution about 10,000 years. These people are primitives and cannot live in a democracy.

Heh. I wonder how you would respond if a more "culturally evolved" individual regarded you and all of your values as "primitive". :rolleyes:

Just something to think about.
 

michaeledward

Grandmaster
Joined
Mar 1, 2003
Messages
6,063
Reaction score
82
MisterMike said:
The cure for Iraq would be to fast-forward evolution about 10,000 years. These people are primitives and cannot live in a democracy.

We're trying to force on them what they cannot understand or adapt into their lifestyles.

Killing off the remaining Bathists and Saddam loyalist and other foreign supporters who have crossed the border seems to be the only answer for now. Then leave them the keys and get out.

I await the responses in support of how a multi-national force would have been better treated by the Iraqi's...
Bigoted statement.
 

michaeledward

Grandmaster
Joined
Mar 1, 2003
Messages
6,063
Reaction score
82
theletch1 said:
Just to add a little fuel to the fire here... How many of the "fanatics" do you think are Syrian or Iranian regulars in civilian clothing?
None ...

"How many insane Syrian or Iranian regulars" .... well, that's another question, isn't it.
 

Ender

Black Belt
Joined
Apr 25, 2003
Messages
684
Reaction score
21
The simple solution would be to divide the country up into the various sects...Sunni's, *****es, Kurds etc....all assets, like oil, would be divided to support each economy...like a divorce.
 

theletch1

Grandmaster
MTS Alumni
Joined
Jan 21, 2003
Messages
8,073
Reaction score
170
Location
79 Wistful Vista
michaeledward said:
None ...

"How many insane Syrian or Iranian regulars" .... well, that's another question, isn't it.
I don't think any of the soldiers from other mid-east countries would be any crazier than the average jarhead (I can use that term) to go where their country sends them to fight for whatever reason their country says to fight for. Both Syria and Iran have been put on the hot plate for various reasons in the near past. Iran especially for their nuclear program. The more heat there is to deal with in various cities in Iraq the less attention is being paid to what is going on in their own countries. It is to their benefit to draw out the conflict for the U.S., bleed our assets do whatever they can to push world opinion further against us. Someone mentioned a crusade earlier. This does indeed remind me of the middle age crusades in that an invading force has entered muslim central to fight a battle. How much difference does a political border matter when something as near and dear as your centuries old religion is being threatened (at least that's how I figure most folks of a jihad mindset in the area see it)? Will we see groups of individuals coming to battle for personal reasons or will we see another situation like the beginning of Korea and have Iran and Syria instead of China sending in troops and supplies?

This link is for the northeast intelligence network. The network is a private organization that provides additional intelligence to the U.S. I've checked his site several times and the intel there generally seems pretty on with what I wind up seeing on the news. Northeast Intelligence Network
 

michaeledward

Grandmaster
Joined
Mar 1, 2003
Messages
6,063
Reaction score
82
theletch1 said:
I don't think any of the soldiers from other mid-east countries would be any crazier than the average jarhead (I can use that term) to go where their country sends them to fight for whatever reason their country says to fight for. Both Syria and Iran have been put on the hot plate for various reasons in the near past. Iran especially for their nuclear program. The more heat there is to deal with in various cities in Iraq the less attention is being paid to what is going on in their own countries. It is to their benefit to draw out the conflict for the U.S., bleed our assets do whatever they can to push world opinion further against us. Someone mentioned a crusade earlier. This does indeed remind me of the middle age crusades in that an invading force has entered muslim central to fight a battle. How much difference does a political border matter when something as near and dear as your centuries old religion is being threatened (at least that's how I figure most folks of a jihad mindset in the area see it)? Will we see groups of individuals coming to battle for personal reasons or will we see another situation like the beginning of Korea and have Iran and Syria instead of China sending in troops and supplies?

This link is for the northeast intelligence network. The network is a private organization that provides additional intelligence to the U.S. I've checked his site several times and the intel there generally seems pretty on with what I wind up seeing on the news. Northeast Intelligence Network
If there are foreign fighters in Iraq, I think it would not be at the behest of their respective governments. Both Iran and Syria are probably doing all they can to avoid being caught up in the whirlwind of Iraq. A very large precentage of the Iranian public (and certainly almost all of those fighting age) were not around in the 1979 religious revolution. They have, for several years (especially during the Clinton era) been working toward normalized relations with the United States. If not for inclusion in the 'Axis of Evil' speech, Iran's relationship with the US might be very different. They have been very much on the path of reform. And Iran's coming clean to the International Atomic Energy Adminstration has very little to do with US power in the Gulf, and a lot to do with sincere diplomatic efforts by the European Union.

Regardless of all that, Nobody is going to try and "Bleed Our Assets". The United States Military Budget is Greater than the next 10 largest nations combined. If the United States ever decided to turn its full attention to any nation, they could not withstand the onslaught for long.

Even the war in Iraq ... currently, the US is allowing the confrontation to be fought in the manner of the Enterprise v Borg ... enough mosquito bites, and we may stop to scratch.

OK ... honestly ... this is a more incoherent post than I would like ... its been a long week. I hope you all can discern my meanings. - Mike
 
M

MisterMike

Guest
michaeledward said:
If there are foreign fighters in Iraq, I think it would not be at the behest of their respective governments. Both Iran and Syria are probably doing all they can to avoid being caught up in the whirlwind of Iraq. A very large precentage of the Iranian public (and certainly almost all of those fighting age) were not around in the 1979 religious revolution. They have, for several years (especially during the Clinton era) been working toward normalized relations with the United States. If not for inclusion in the 'Axis of Evil' speech, Iran's relationship with the US might be very different. They have been very much on the path of reform. And Iran's coming clean to the International Atomic Energy Adminstration has very little to do with US power in the Gulf, and a lot to do with sincere diplomatic efforts by the European Union.

Regardless of all that, Nobody is going to try and "Bleed Our Assets". The United States Military Budget is Greater than the next 10 largest nations combined. If the United States ever decided to turn its full attention to any nation, they could not withstand the onslaught for long.

Even the war in Iraq ... currently, the US is allowing the confrontation to be fought in the manner of the Enterprise v Borg ... enough mosquito bites, and we may stop to scratch.

OK ... honestly ... this is a more incoherent post than I would like ... its been a long week. I hope you all can discern my meanings. - Mike

If only I could roll my eyes 360 degrees....

Then this might look like it makes sense.
 
R

rmcrobertson

Guest
Well, thank ahura-mazda there are no similarities to the Vietnam War here.

I mean, it's not as though our government started a war based on trumped- up charges, lied like crazy to defend itself, lumbered into a complex situation without understanding what was going on, refused to consider history or international resistance, supported fascists like Nguyen Cao Ky and M. Chalabi, whipped up racist frenzies to further justify itself, kept getting working-class young men and women killed for ill-defined objectives, claimed that we'd have to fight in this country if we didn't fight there to justify itself, lied about costs, attacked the left wing and dissenters to justify itself, sent more and more troops for ill-defined reasons, killed more and more civilians and passed that off as unfortunate but necessary, kept getting in deeper and deeper, skipped over dealing with problems at home, and....

Hey, wait a minute.
 
OP
Makalakumu

Makalakumu

Gonzo Karate Apocalypse
MT Mentor
Joined
Oct 30, 2003
Messages
13,887
Reaction score
232
Location
Hawaii
rmcrobertson said:
Well, thank ahura-mazda there are no similarities to the Vietnam War here.

I mean, it's not as though our government started a war based on trumped- up charges, lied like crazy to defend itself, lumbered into a complex situation without understanding what was going on, refused to consider history or international resistance, supported fascists like Nguyen Cao Ky and M. Chalabi, whipped up racist frenzies to further justify itself, kept getting working-class young men and women killed for ill-defined objectives, claimed that we'd have to fight in this country if we didn't fight there to justify itself, lied about costs, attacked the left wing and dissenters to justify itself, sent more and more troops for ill-defined reasons, killed more and more civilians and passed that off as unfortunate but necessary, kept getting in deeper and deeper, skipped over dealing with problems at home, and....

Hey, wait a minute.

So, are we back to 1965? Where are all the hippies that should know the answer to this question? I wasn't alive then.
 

michaeledward

Grandmaster
Joined
Mar 1, 2003
Messages
6,063
Reaction score
82
upnorthkyosa said:
So, are we back to 1965? Where are all the hippies that should know the answer to this question? I wasn't alive then.
I was born in 1964, so I wasn't too aware in 1965.

If you are asking about those college-age kids that were participating in the summer of love, and Woodstock, most of them now listen to Rush Limbaugh and his ilk; from whom they hear statements like "These people (Iraqis) are primatives" over and over again. They don't necessarily think about what that statement means, but they sure do repeat it (Kinda like Dr. Rice saying no-body could have anticipated terrorists using planes as weapons).

I think most of these college age kids are not objecting more strenuously because we now have an all volunteer military force. Those 18 - 19 - 20 year olds who are in college aren't worrying about what happens to them when they graduate. (You know Dick Cheney got married right out of college for the marriage deferment ... and when the marriage deferment went away, Lynn Cheney got pregnent, and he got a deferment as a father ....before his first child was born). There is a lot of noise about re-instating the draft. There is a lot of noise about how the delayed rotation out is a consription by any other name.

It will get interesting from here ... won't it.
 
Top