Al Qaeda is FAILING - Communications intercepted!

The Iraq war now costs tax payers $2 billions PER WEEK.

 

A better place would be?

 

Buy two now, get one war for free!

 

......Tahiti

I don't know....but I'd like to take part in looking at every part of current conditions.

 

Exactly! Bush obviously hasn't learn't any lessons from Vietnam (because he was hiding?) You can't fight a disjointed and mobile enemy with traditional warfare. Surgical strategic strikes are far more effective and easier for the general public to back. But who are we kidding that Iraq is about terrorism? Pakistan has more terrorists and training camps than the whole of the Middle East combined, and they're supposed to be an ally!

 

That's kinda my point. Everyone thinks a "better plan is needed" but when pressed for specifics, they either way anything but the current one or I don't know.

If we make it simpler...let's say you have 2 choices of battlefields:
Afghanistan or Iraq (the 2 open combat areas).

Which of those 2 is more conducive to killing terrorists at a better clip?

Afghanistan is full of mountains, caves, tunnels, etc to hide in. They know the territory well and know how to fight there, having fought off the Soviet Union back in the day.

Iraq is essentially a level desert. Our military has "control" of the cities and is playing a defensive game (which I think is silly, but nonetheless) and it forces them to come to us to be killed.

Given one option - hunting them down in their own backyard or making them come to us. Which is better? I think Iraq is a far better option. I'd like to have seen more troops, less of a rush to baghdad and take care of fighters along the way, etc but hindsight is 20/20.

 

And it's always Bush that makes the specific military strategic plans that individual battalions follow There's no role of military leaders or ANYTHING ....

You just want to make it all Bush's fault, of course...

 

Who says they'll come to us? Terrorists are interested in fighting an army. It's a numbers game for the. One suicide bomber/car bomb/roadside bomb = many injured or killed and at most one or two of them. That's why defensive tactics won't work. It has to be about intelligence, finding their key men and taking them out where they are hiding. Sitting back achieves nothing but them losing some of their foot soldiers and us losing many more.

 

So you're saying Bush isn't in charge? Who is?

 

Given that Iraq is the "cause celebre" for terrorists and that al qaida operates there and they are being imported there; makes you think they are coming to us, doesn't it?

But, anyways. If you stay if Afghanistan, you'll be hunting them cave to cave, mountain to mountain over there. Not the type of battle anyone wants to be fighting (except the terrorists).

 

No, I'm not saying that... your just assuming that. What I mean for you to interpret is that military commanders/leaders give specific orders to their men to fight the war the way they do... where to go, with what weapons, etc... Bush is Commander in Chief, but he does not actually coordinate each specific military action.

I can't believe you don't know this!! You actually think the President would have the time to do ALL of that?

 

I don't spot Bin laden or any of the other top guys in Iraq, just the endless foot soldiers.

I don't advocate that either, both plans are majorly flawed.

 

If we weren't funding the war effort by our government, then there would be no government to pay taxes to. But of course, taxes should have a higher priority over NATIONAL DEFENSE!

(Sound like a good thing? THINK DEEPER! If not our government, then whose... do you suppose...?)

 

Of course they do, but overal strategy (which is what everyone's talking about) is decided by him. At the very least he'd be advised on it and approve the decision. As he's the man at the top, 'the buck stops there' as they say

 

Bully for them. Bin Laden wouldn't be at the base of the next building that got blown up either, so the point is moot. The foot soldiers, as you put it, do the dirty work anyways. For some reason, the leaders who say that suicide bombing is wonderful, never engage in the activity themselves. It's very odd

So as long as they are willing to die someplace (other than in a city here), good for them.

 

The US is not Occupying any Middle Eastern Country. Unlike the dictators or religious states that are occupying them. What is the Muslim world worried about democracy that they will not let it rule their governments?

Besides Hugo Chavez despises the US and thinks President Bush has him on a hit list. He said this after the US found Saddam Hussein in a 3 foot hole in the ground.

I know you maybe angry and incited by other users comments. But it makes one wonder about your affiliations Menj.

For someone who is Anti Republican where did you learn the chant "Heil GTech! Heil the Fifth Reich!"

 

Exactly my point. As long as the leaders exist there will be and endless stream of brainwashed fools ready to die for the cause.

 

But killing the leader will not stop if from happening either. Bin Laden could be dead today. Will terrorism stop? No, just some new fool will come in and take his place. Long term change HAS to happen over there for it to stop, until then; you have to keep killing them. Someone over there has to get sick of the cycle eventually.

 

These guys say?

 

yeah look how quick the jews and arabs got sick of fighting