Quote:
Originally posted by rcne,
Exactly what hopefully we learned - if you're going to do it - do it, finish it without remorse. The ongoing limited force campaign is unsuited to achieve the goal of a stable Iraq, Afghanistan.
Harsh, indeed. Sometimes overwhelming force is the best persuader - aka Alexander the Great, Genghis Khan. |
So what are you advocating? Shall we just go in and kill everybody that doesn't like us? Do that, or even close to it and the last shred of the facade that we are there to "bring freedom to Iraq" is blown away.
When no WMD's were found, Bush changed his rationale for the war to saving the Iraqi's from saddam. What are we going to tell the world about the reasons for deposing saddam when the number of casualties we have caused exceed the number of murders he committed?
Our enemies in Iraq are totally, religiously, and culturally dedicated to their cause, even willing to use suicide missions to attack us. They are fighting on their own turf, with no time restrictions, and they can continue these attacks indefinitely. National elections in January are going to do about as much to stop the attacks as turning over sovereignty to a puppet Iraqi government did. No matter what we do or give to them, there are going to be large numbers of Iraqi's that will be totally opposed to American troops on their soil. In addition, large numbers of foreign fighters will be attracted to aid what they see as patriots trying to defend their country against an occupation force.
If our purpose in Iraq is to defer attacks here in the United States by offering our troops as easy substitute targets, we are succeeding. But don't you think our GI's deserve to be told why they are being sacrificed??
Edited for grammar.