Tweet
Of course, if you believe the article Ramo posted, that map is meaningless.
-Arrian
-Arrian
-
grog want tank...Grog Want Tank... GROG WANT TANK!
The trick isn't to break some eggs to make an omelette, it's convincing the eggs to break themselves in order to aspire to omelettehood. -
Odd he insists that the big ticket political issues are the ones hampering progress, then posts an article having nothing to do with his theory.Of course, if you believe the article Ramo posted, that map is meaningless.
We can pull those articles out tick for tack. The fact is Iraqi forces are increasingly taking control and violence is not increasing and they are not collapsing. Go figure."The DPRK is still in a state of war with the U.S. It's called a black out." - Che explaining why orbital nightime pictures of NK show few lights. Seriously.Comment
-
Yes, I listen to the top generals. When they say that logistically we can't sustain the "Surge" past a certain date, I take them at their word.Oh, so now you listen to what the Pentagon says
Again, why don't you investigate what that actually means. Your cherry picking in this regard is astonishing.
I have no idea what you think that I think they mean, but this is a really pointless argument on your part...
Yeah, it sure would be nice to have a totally functioning, capable Iraqi force that's not in bed with the Shia militias. And raining lolipops too. That would be really sweet.Oddly enough, thats not what I said. Please try not to pretend we haven't had this discussion before. But yeah, I can't understand why a funtioning and capable Iraqi military and police would not be a boon to stability or all types.
Try not to get lost in your own rhetoric.
We did have this discussion before, and what you're saying is just as ridiculous now as it was then.
The fundamental problem in Iraq is and always has been lack of political reconciliation. The lack of security is a symptom of that, given that violence a year and a half ago was far below what it is right now...
Again, civilian violence is at pre-surge levels. In other words, really, really bad. It's not a matter of insurgents trying to make the situation look bad. It's that the situation is bad. Horrendous.Do you think the insurgents didn't have the capability to do this for the last three years? Do you think they couldn't do it again?
Fact is some faction saw the progress and decided to media whitewash it by flash banging the public with a singluar, symbolic, display of power.
Not that you needed it, but at least now you can say "Oh my god, everyone look, all of Iraq is aflame."
Kind of like how all the nations bridges are about to collapse.
Of course the insurgents have done this sort of thing before, and will do this sort of thing again (though this was a milestone in terms of magnitude of violence). I don't see how that helps your point."Beware of the man who works hard to learn something, learns it, and finds himself no wiser than before. He is full of murderous resentment of people who are ignorant without having come by their ignorance the hard way. "
-BokononComment
-
That no matter how good things get, insurgents will probably be able to pull something like this off for decades to come.Of course the insurgents have done this sort of thing before, and will do this sort of thing again (though this was a milestone in terms of magnitude of violence). I don't see how that helps your point.
Hell, citizens here can pull this off, does that mean we are a awash in anarchy?"The DPRK is still in a state of war with the U.S. It's called a black out." - Che explaining why orbital nightime pictures of NK show few lights. Seriously.Comment
-
It would appear that you don't believe Ramo's article. Ok. It sounded pretty believeable to me.
-Arriangrog want tank...Grog Want Tank... GROG WANT TANK!
The trick isn't to break some eggs to make an omelette, it's convincing the eggs to break themselves in order to aspire to omelettehood.Comment
-
I don't know that I agree with your version of the surge's aims. Presumably, if you defeat the insurgents, that would have a lasting impact on security.Originally posted by Arrian
As always, it depends on how you define success. For instance, the surge was aimed at improving security for a fairly brief period of time in order that the Iraqi government could work some things out during a period of (relative) calm.I came upon a barroom full of bad Salon pictures in which men with hats on the backs of their heads were wolfing food from a counter. It was the institution of the "free lunch" I had struck. You paid for a drink and got as much as you wanted to eat. For something less than a rupee a day a man can feed himself sumptuously in San Francisco, even though he be a bankrupt. Remember this if ever you are stranded in these parts. ~ Rudyard Kipling, 1891Comment
-
Again, the Sinjar bombing was not a fluke. It was less than 20% of reported civilian casualties this month. It's representative of the fact that the security situation is really bad. I should add that, in contrast to the earlier phase of the "Surge," death squads have come back in force, making the civilian casualty situation a more two-sided affair (again, like before the "Surge")."Beware of the man who works hard to learn something, learns it, and finds himself no wiser than before. He is full of murderous resentment of people who are ignorant without having come by their ignorance the hard way. "
-BokononComment
-
I think you don't really beat them militarily (if you want to call it that) until you beat them politically.Originally posted by DanS
I don't know that I agree with your version of the surge's aims. Presumably, if you defeat the insurgents, that would have a lasting impact on security.I drank beer. I like beer. I still like beer. ... Do you like beer Senator?
- Justice Brett KavanaughComment
-
Becasue I can provide another just as good saying the opposite. Or I can listen to the three guys at my command that came back last week, that say the oppostie also.It would appear that you don't believe Ramo's article. Ok. It sounded pretty believeable to me.
Again, we can go tick for tack with these articles all day, but until Ramo comes up with numbers he has nothing."The DPRK is still in a state of war with the U.S. It's called a black out." - Che explaining why orbital nightime pictures of NK show few lights. Seriously.Comment
-
You don't defeat an insurgency militarily - or at least not solely via the military. The military aim was to provide "calm" for the Iraqi government so it could find political solutions that would in turn abate the insurgency.Originally posted by DanS
I don't know that I agree with your version of the surge's aims. Presumably, if you defeat the insurgents, that would have a lasting impact on security.
Do you seriously believe that if we simply kill enough "bad guys" we win?
-Arriangrog want tank...Grog Want Tank... GROG WANT TANK!
The trick isn't to break some eggs to make an omelette, it's convincing the eggs to break themselves in order to aspire to omelettehood.Comment
-
That's not the surge's aims. That was our priority before the surge. The intent of the surge was to bolster our ability to protect civilian populations to facilitate national reconcilation. As I wrote earlier (and as the soldiers who wrote the Times piece said), the Anbar model of creating Sunni Arab militias outside of the central gov't's control is in direct contradiction with the surge's aims.I don't know that I agree with your version of the surge's aims. Presumably, if you defeat the insurgents, that would have a lasting impact on security."Beware of the man who works hard to learn something, learns it, and finds himself no wiser than before. He is full of murderous resentment of people who are ignorant without having come by their ignorance the hard way. "
-BokononComment
-
Numbers for what? Civilian casualties?Again, we can go tick for tack with these articles all day, but until Ramo comes up with numbers he has nothing."Beware of the man who works hard to learn something, learns it, and finds himself no wiser than before. He is full of murderous resentment of people who are ignorant without having come by their ignorance the hard way. "
-BokononComment
-
Anything to show the Iraqi military and police are not increasing in responsibilty and capability and size at a reasonable pace.Numbers for what? Civilian casualties?
If you have impossible expectations, don't be suprised if they don't happen."The DPRK is still in a state of war with the U.S. It's called a black out." - Che explaining why orbital nightime pictures of NK show few lights. Seriously.Comment
-
Have you not been reading my posts? The entire point is that a steadily growing Iraqi Army isn't going to address the roots of the problem.
If you have pointless expectations, don't be surprised if everything goes to hell..."Beware of the man who works hard to learn something, learns it, and finds himself no wiser than before. He is full of murderous resentment of people who are ignorant without having come by their ignorance the hard way. "
-BokononComment
-
Perhaps it's mostly a military question. Certainly, since Vietnam, this thought has not been en vogue in the US.Originally posted by Arrian
You don't defeat an insurgency militarily - or at least not solely via the military.I came upon a barroom full of bad Salon pictures in which men with hats on the backs of their heads were wolfing food from a counter. It was the institution of the "free lunch" I had struck. You paid for a drink and got as much as you wanted to eat. For something less than a rupee a day a man can feed himself sumptuously in San Francisco, even though he be a bankrupt. Remember this if ever you are stranded in these parts. ~ Rudyard Kipling, 1891Comment
Comment