With both campaigns is that neither one seems willing to do what it takes to win in Iraq and get the hell out.
Go to "Soldiers for the Truth" ... their own axe to grind to be sure, but revealing comments ... www.sftt.org ... many soldiers don't have proper body armor, weapons, ammo, commo gear, armored vehicles (the Humvee is a joke, never intended for urban combat), even HOT MEALS. That's right, many soldiers don't have hot meals and instead get MREs. [Combat effectiveness is inversely proportional to how many MRE's vs. hot meals troops get, MREs are NOT subsitutes for hot meals] Families are sending food, even ammo to soldiers who ship out with nothing and get nothing in theatre. It's not even appalling but criminal.
Meanwhile just when Marines and Soldiers are on the verge of wiping out a nest of bad guys (Fallujah, Najaf, etc) they get pulled back. On orders, no doubt, from the White House.
Kerry? Even if they wanted to (and Kerry won't change that), NATO and the Arab nations don't have much in the way of military forces OR transport and supply to police Iraq. Powell was right. We broke it, so we own it. NATO is not even able to commit more troops to Afghanistan, much less than Iraq. The Iraqis can't and won't confront the Baathists, Islamicists, and Shiite political militias that are kidnapping anyone rebuilding the country (and beheading them), blowing up infrastructure, killing government officials, and making the country an ungovernable mess.
We could always just leave like Somalia, but that would just hand Bin Laden a great victory, and Putin was right. The weak get beaten. No one seems to have a plan to win (which unfortunately requires killing a *lot* of bad guys) and get out.
And notice how both campaigns forgot Osama? Bin Laden who? Currently "hiding" with his pals in Western Pakistan?
If Kerry came out with a "Kerry Doctrine" and said flat out he'd pursue Bin Laden (and kill him) anywhere in the world, even into Pakistan, with massive military force, he'd win in a walk over. Bush failed in job #1 which was to find and kill Bin Laden. But Kerry is as silent as Bush. I can't understand it. Particularly since it's Bush's single biggest failure (and that's saying something).
Both sides want to pretend we are not at war with people who want to kill us. I just don't understand it.
And I can see no end in sight. No doubt posterity will show George W as the man responsible for this bloody mess. If only justice would prevail when he gets kicked out of the White House and he receives a call up to finally complete military service long overdue.
On another note have you seen Soundtrack to War? A documentary made by an Aussie called George Gittoes. A deeply moving doco on how soldiers use music to get them through this nightmare. I can't recommend it enough. Brilliant.
![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
no subject
Bastards. I can't wait to see how the RNC spins this.
no subject
(Anonymous) 2004-09-07 07:23 pm (UTC)(link)The definition of casualties includes wounded, so by that definition, there have been over 5,000 American casualties in Iraq.
It's tragic.
The problem ...
(Anonymous) 2004-09-07 09:58 pm (UTC)(link)Go to "Soldiers for the Truth" ... their own axe to grind to be sure, but revealing comments ... www.sftt.org ... many soldiers don't have proper body armor, weapons, ammo, commo gear, armored vehicles (the Humvee is a joke, never intended for urban combat), even HOT MEALS. That's right, many soldiers don't have hot meals and instead get MREs. [Combat effectiveness is inversely proportional to how many MRE's vs. hot meals troops get, MREs are NOT subsitutes for hot meals] Families are sending food, even ammo to soldiers who ship out with nothing and get nothing in theatre. It's not even appalling but criminal.
Meanwhile just when Marines and Soldiers are on the verge of wiping out a nest of bad guys (Fallujah, Najaf, etc) they get pulled back. On orders, no doubt, from the White House.
Kerry? Even if they wanted to (and Kerry won't change that), NATO and the Arab nations don't have much in the way of military forces OR transport and supply to police Iraq. Powell was right. We broke it, so we own it. NATO is not even able to commit more troops to Afghanistan, much less than Iraq. The Iraqis can't and won't confront the Baathists, Islamicists, and Shiite political militias that are kidnapping anyone rebuilding the country (and beheading them), blowing up infrastructure, killing government officials, and making the country an ungovernable mess.
We could always just leave like Somalia, but that would just hand Bin Laden a great victory, and Putin was right. The weak get beaten. No one seems to have a plan to win (which unfortunately requires killing a *lot* of bad guys) and get out.
And notice how both campaigns forgot Osama? Bin Laden who? Currently "hiding" with his pals in Western Pakistan?
If Kerry came out with a "Kerry Doctrine" and said flat out he'd pursue Bin Laden (and kill him) anywhere in the world, even into Pakistan, with massive military force, he'd win in a walk over. Bush failed in job #1 which was to find and kill Bin Laden. But Kerry is as silent as Bush. I can't understand it. Particularly since it's Bush's single biggest failure (and that's saying something).
Both sides want to pretend we are not at war with people who want to kill us. I just don't understand it.
no subject
On another note have you seen Soundtrack to War? A documentary made by an Aussie called George Gittoes. A deeply moving doco on how soldiers use music to get them through this nightmare. I can't recommend it enough. Brilliant.