Nightmare Scenario: Over a thousand dead US soldiers and a bill of around $125bn...

[The diplomat]

Originally posted by MichaeltheGreat
Then I suppose my brother dying as a result of Agent Orange caused cancers didn't really happen, nor did his indirect participation in Ranch Hand, which of course didn't exist because of some book or article you read which says we didn't use chemical agents in Nam.

Of course, Agent Orange wasn't a chemical weapon per se, it didn't kill things quickly enough, that's why grunts joked about it by using the old Dupont slogan "better living through chemistry"

Then again, the lack of testing on something that was the most potent "weed killer" ever developed by some orders of magnitude is a bit interesting, but no more so than the early above-ocean nuke tests where the US had enlisted men go out on deck and cover their eyes, while officers stayed inside closed quarters on the ships.

I am just saying that the story about how the US soldiers deliberatly used chemical warfare on AWOL personel fleeing in Laos was proved to be fabricated. Peter Arnett admitted later that the story was fake and did resign as a result.

[OneFootInTheGrave]

Originally posted by MichaeltheGreat



And they did that in response to your buddies and ours in Delhi building their own nuke. Tell you what, why doesn't the EU commit it's military forces with us, and we'll jointly declare an "Indo-Pakistani Nuclear Weapon Free Greater Co-Prosperity Sphere" and invade the bastards and do something about it?

Yeah

Allright!



It's actually a good idea, but how do you invade India and Pakistan without starting a WWIII?

But actually if something could be done about that we would all fancy the idea of less nukes in the world, I think it was only South Africa that voluntarily disrmed all the way... well they might have had a dozen nukes at most, but regardless they have none now... how about persuading India and Pakistan in the same way ...
I wish
Anyway it was the Chinese that Pakistan got the tech from I think, where did India acquire the tech, or did they develop it on their own?

[Evil Knevil]

Oh, I'm Scottish btw. So it isn't exactly treason. Although, obviously I want the British Army to pay in blood as well.

[Victor Galis]

This comment makes me sick to my core!

This just shows the utter extreme level of hate the Left has towards Bush. To actually wish for Americans to die by the thousands in order to win an election, is utterly perverse and despicable. We may have despised Clinton but we never ever wished for mass murder in order to defeat him.

Clinton was actually elected to office in a fair election.

[Vandal-1]

Contextualizing the Nightmare
If we see a evolving resistence centered around an area {the Triangle} then that area may be sectered out and its inhabititants forcefully relocated,and thus secure sections will be created around key infrastructure ,and access to weapons caches will be terminated.(examples of this counter-insugency tactic used by the US in Greece 47 and Columbia early90s)
Secoundly having created base zones the conflict will become less positional in nature the rest of the country
can rot , we won't even leave a outhouse standing.
Thirdly We will improve assets in the Kurdish area they can be the example of prosperity. while attempting to raise Arab paramilitary forces and inteligence personel.Other forces will most likely be solicited for ..whose scources might include former Soviet
countries such as Tajikistan, Kazak and Uzebekistan.They have an interest in building and maintaining security in central asia with out US/ UK interference.
Conclusions: The current "bleed rate" and "Colateral Kill rate" has not yet peaked since fullscale counter-insurgency is not yet under way One can speculate that the Bush administration is hestitant to begin this military phase becuase it will inevitably lead to more bad press,while he already has enough ...whatever.
During operatioins to clear areas causualties usually increase I will look for some stats on these type of actions,but if they are successful then casualties decrease.
The net ablity of the resistence to recruit has not yet grown to its fruition if such measures are employed.
and the size as well as the frequency of the attacks are likely to increase in the short run.
In the context of our present methodology I accept your figures ,but when I apply known doctrine the picture changes.How many Iraqi males of Sunni, Bedoin,
.ect are there ,What % can we expect to Kill or capture ,displace?What is the weapons potential in a given area and what is the mechanism of supply?
Based on these factors I would say it isnot valid to extrapolate from the current situation over a 36 mnth period. Thank you

[Imran Siddiqui]

What's with all the anality lately?

Because I now realize that one of your major problems is that you have no concept of defintions and prefer to make up your own whenever you feel like it.

[GePap]

Originally posted by Imran Siddiqui

What's with all the anality lately?

Because I now realize that one of your major problems is that you have no concept of defintions and prefer to make up your own whenever you feel like it.

That is sadly all to common here.

[Uncle Sparky]

Originally posted by Victor Galis
I fail to see how this is a nightmare scenario.

I agree. America wanted a war to save the oil. If it costs several thousand US soldiers, its well worth it !

Think of the employment its creating and think of the return for shareholders of companies like Stevedores, a Seattle based company that is running Basra and Haliburton, Cheney's company which has several "subcontracts". (recap - The word got out after about a week of fighting that Haliburton had been awarded major contracts in the parts of Iraq the US tenuously held at the time. This was denied, confirmed then clarified.)

Funny how in Afghanistan, which has no significant oil, the US installed a government immediately upon Kabul falling.

Funny too, with all the press coverage, I seemed to miss the Iraqi capitulation ceremony. You'd think the US media would have covered that. If Iraq hasn't surrendered, then the war is still on. Expect casualties. The US, UK & Poland are the occupying powers, on par with the Germans in France in WW II.

Btw - Did anyone else take note that the US is manning Iraqi foreign consulates & embassies with Saddam appointees ?

[The diplomat]

Originally posted by Victor Galis
Clinton was actually elected to office in a fair election.

Even if Bush was unfairly elected (which he was not) still would not justify wishing for thousands of dead american soldiers.

[Victor Galis]

Even if Bush was unfairly elected (which he was not) still would not justify wishing for thousands of dead american soldiers.

But you are willing to lose them for someone else's freedom, why not for your own?

[HershOstropoler]

Re: Re: Nightmare Scenario: Over a thousand dead US soldiers and a bill of around $125bn...

Originally posted by MichaeltheGreat

The current "bleed rate" and the rate of funds being spent will both go down, not up, with transition to an Iraqi provisional government and Iraqi primary security.

You really believe that?

[The diplomat]

Originally posted by Victor Galis
But you are willing to lose them for someone else's freedom, why not for your own?

A) We are not loosing our freedom.

B) You can't compare Bush to Saddam. Bush is a democratic president, Saddam was a hitlerian tyrant.

C) There is a big difference between losing your life while fighting a threat to your freedom (like in the US war of independance) and wishing for a far flung enemy to kill your own people.

[The diplomat]

If we are losing our freedom, how come all the peace protests before the war were allowed to happen? How come all the celebrities like Martin Sheen and Susan Surandon were allowed to express their anti-bush views?

The only loss of freedom was the unsconstitutional Campaign Finance Reform which Bush foolishly signed into law.

[MichaeltheGreat]

Re: Re: Re: Nightmare Scenario: Over a thousand dead US soldiers and a bill of around $125bn...

Originally posted by HershOstropoler


You really believe that?

Yeah, for a number of reasons, but this threat is already to teenage-idiotified to attempt intelligent discussion of the issue.

[HershOstropoler]

I don't think that is a problem with an inbuilt ignore function.

Do you expect a withdrawal from police work to some sort of strategic control a la Afghanistan?