Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
The problem with buiding a full-up military in a country like Iraq is that its infrastructure is severely fractured and too easily penetrated by enemy factions. Also, the populace is loyal to its tribe before its government
That is why it takes so long,it isn't an overnight process.
Hopefuly we are seeing the beginning of the end,once the people of Iraq have confidence in themselves we will see less need for US forces.
But once Iraq is no longer as pressing an issue there will be more troops available for Afghanistan.
You mean like before we decided to sidetrack and invade Iraq, which caused the al qaeda to follow us over there? ...yes, I agree there will be more troops available then...again...
Seems like we are almost going in circles, does it not?
That is why it takes so long,it isn't an overnight process.
Hopefuly we are seeing the beginning of the end,once the people of Iraq have confidence in themselves we will see less need for US forces.
The US may not even have the necessary funds to finance such a military. There are certainly more Iraqi boots on the ground now than a few years ago, but with our debt I don't think we could keep it up. It may take the kind of time we just don't have, while al-qaida and other factions have all the time in the world.
You mean like before we decided to sidetrack and invade Iraq, which caused the al qaeda to follow us over there? ...yes, I agree there will be more troops available then...again...
Seems like we are almost going in circles, does it not?
It is like going in circles. I couldn't tell you how many times they told us that troop reductions are on the way. They have an infux of new troops that merge with troops for extended tours which don't last (and it hurts retention)
The current 'surge' did reduce violence...back down to '04 levels, which ain't saying much
Everybody always tries to oversimplify this. There's enough contradictory successes, failures, disasters, and reconciliations for us to be winning spectacularly and losing catastrophically at the same time. But nobody knows how it'll all end up in the end. It's more in the hands of the Iraqi people than in ours, though we've helped to put them in the predicament. I don't think, however, that there will be an end to the violence as long as the US is all up in their face trying to exert its will over them (at least as they see it). That's not intended as a categorical statement that it's best to withdraw every troop tomorrow, but rather an acknowledgement that as long as we're there, building bases and trying to influence their government with our presence, we will be seen as occupiers and violent resistance/terrorism will continue in some form or another.
Last edited by fishmonger; 01-29-2008 at 11:35 AM..
The US may not even have the necessary funds to finance such a military. There are certainly more Iraqi boots on the ground now than a few years ago, but with our debt I don't think we could keep it up. It may take the kind of time we just don't have, while al-qaida and other factions have all the time in the world.
Iraq could pay for it...It did before(I believe Iraq had the third largest military in the world prior to GWI)
Iraq could pay for it...It did before(I believe Iraq had the third largest military in the world prior to GWI)
The problems with that is their current debt is beyond extreme, their oil production is much lower than pre-war levels because of constant insurgent interference and outdated facilities.
Saddam was able to fund his military because he starved his populace of oil riches. He also bought most of his military weaponry and virtually had no weapons research programs (minus the nuke facilities tried but destroyed by Israel)
Everybody always tries to oversimplify this. There's enough contradictory successes, failures, disasters, and reconciliations for us to be winning spectacularly and losing catastrophically at the same time. But nobody knows how it'll all end up in the end.
Of course no-one knows,it isn't movie or TV show but real life.
No-one knew how WWII or any war would end up.
I do believe you can take signs and achievements and form an opinion though.
In WWII the US started to cut back on manufacturing arms in late 1944 because the war in europe was almost over and the Germans were all but defeated.
The problems with that is their current debt is beyond extreme, their oil production is much lower than pre-war levels because of constant insurgent interference and outdated facilities.
But if the terrorists can be neutralised the problems with production would quickly vanish,the oil companies surely would LOVE to help get oil production going.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
