Nope and nope.

But I do think the US military could have been better served by it's civilian masters.

__________________
.




"When I'm in command, every mission is a suicide mission!" -Capt. Zapp Branigan
The United Church of the Latter Day Tangential Tarts

What does this mean? Civilian masters? You do realize that the United States is not a military dictatorship don't you? Members of congress are considered civilians.

__________________
lambaste me not

It means just that. The US Military is under the control of this country's civilian leadership. As it should be... which also means the civilian leaders needs to take great care before sending the military off to invade another country.

__________________
.




"When I'm in command, every mission is a suicide mission!" -Capt. Zapp Branigan
The United Church of the Latter Day Tangential Tarts

And do you feel that great care was not taken before? Do you not believe that great care was not taken to minimize casualties while fighting?

__________________
lambaste me not

I've already answered that question in detail a few pages back... NO, I do not agree with Pres.Bush's decision to invade Iraq, so NO, I don't think the civilian leadership has taken great care of the US military.



I'm sure the boots in country are doing the best they can under the circumstances they now find themselves in.

__________________
.




"When I'm in command, every mission is a suicide mission!" -Capt. Zapp Branigan
The United Church of the Latter Day Tangential Tarts

I could discredit everything said in this thread.. Bryan is not digging deep enough.. Have you read the 9-11 commission report or the Daughler Report?

C'mon.. do some research.. (CNN is not research)

Here is a great quote:

" doubt any election in Iraq will succeed. I hope it does but look at this with open eyes. What you now have is a country full of Timothy McVeighs. And to add to the "fun" the USA have now given them a reason to fight not to mention a nice juicy target. Please remind yourself the insurgents are not a relative handful. They are well armed, well trained and well financed. And most of all they will keep on coming and they don't mind dying."

There are, or were, 300000 people living in Fallujah and we are currently fighting 12000 to 15000 terrorists there.. Hardly a country full of Timothy McVeighs.. Many of these have come in from countries like Syria and Iran.. Do the math.. Seems like a handful to me..

Truth is your WAAAAYY of base on this whole issue.

Also, statistics out today show that in the battle for Fallujah, American and Iraqi forces have killed over 1200 of the enemy.. We've lost a mere 38 soldiers.. Successful numbers by any count.. (Regretful, ofcourse, that we even lost one.)

__________________
"Where there is no God, all is permitted." - Fyodor Dostoyevski

The civilian leadership has had 3 years to debate this issue with public..

On November 2 the civilian leadership of this country voted to extend this agenda.. Those who would prefer to leave have lost the debate.. Sorry Ted.

The country is in the 'right' hands.

__________________
"Where there is no God, all is permitted." - Fyodor Dostoyevski

But you have no ideas as to what the alternatives would be. You just know things are bad, but have no idea how they could be better? Weak.

__________________
lambaste me not

No need to apologize.

It was the the wrong decision to invade Iraq and giving the president another 4 years to fix that mess is a good idea imo.


Discuss various alternatives in detail...To what end, powergrid? To sit here and play president or play soldier perhaps?

Like I told SS, read some of the declassified reports at the WarCollege/SSI.. they offer some concrete recommendations and observations about the war. You can then decide on your own without having to waste time debating it endlessly back and forth here.

Most of it is on a strategic level such as refocusing the Global War on Terror back against AQ, it's cells, and towards reinforcing USA's homeland security.

As for Iraq, the tactical realities of the occupation are limited since it's an anti-insurgency conflict... the US military needs to buy time so the local Iraqi forces can be brought up to speed and take control of their own country. Forget about democracy in the near future... stability is something the Iraqi people needs first. Do any of you actually believe that a free and fair election can happen in Iraq by Jan of 05? They'll be content with martial law as long as bullets aren't flying all over the place and car bombs aren't blowing up everyday. Wouldn't any of you if you were an Iraqi?

The GWoT as currently defined by the Bush administration is strategically unfocused, it's goals of riding the world of terrorism unrealistic and has dissipated the US military's force concentration by occupying 2 hostile nations at the same time.

Bottomline is the USA can & should destroy AQ but it can never rid the world of terrorism. Both kerry and the president knows this.. which is why they both made those comment about not winning the war against terrorism. Now the president just needs to refocus on AlQeada and be upfront with the american people and redefine this war.



Nothing I wrote here is new.. it's been circulating for quite some time but our politicians have been in the midst of an election and were afraid the American public cannot handle the truth. They are wrong.. we can handle the truth. I'd rather have the truth than an endless crusade trying to rid the whole world of terrorism.


T

__________________
.




"When I'm in command, every mission is a suicide mission!" -Capt. Zapp Branigan
The United Church of the Latter Day Tangential Tarts

If by "peechykeen perfect" you mean "Better than anyone else's plan", then I agree.

Or at least you assume that....but cant say exactly how.

Especially since no one else has any better ideas...