Level Extreme platform
Subscription
Corporate profile
Products & Services
Support
Legal
Français
Iraq Civil War
Message
From
07/04/2006 15:25:06
 
 
General information
Forum:
Politics
Category:
Other
Title:
Miscellaneous
Thread ID:
01111248
Message ID:
01111548
Views:
15
I get the feeling based on your other comments you are an optimist for our future. So you think that even though there have been several instances of behavior that could be investigated, yet weren't, this one will tip the scales?

Also, I'm curious how you feel about some of the Iraq analysis' coming out now. I read Tom Clancy's book co-authored by Zinni. I found Zinni to be a forthright kind of guy then. I didn't understand why he called for Rumsfeld's resignation last Sunday.

But the article in this weeks New Yorker goes into a rather indepth analysis of why a majority of the failures in Iraq can be directly blamed on Rumsfeld. Rumsfeld's decisions have put our troops in harms way. He has done this by creating policies that have emboldened the insurgency. These strategies are a direct result of his failure to recognize the insurgency as such.

Once you recognize you have an insurgency to deal with, your war strategy must change. According to a document written in the UK a while back when they had to deal with an insurgency, your strategy should consist of a 20% military, 80% political solution.

This is what Murtha is proposing when he asked for a complete withdrawl of all troops. I don't know if any of the conservative sites you read discuss Murtha, but today on Huffingtonpost is the text of a speech he gave yesterday. It calls for withdrawing all troops and assembling them as a massive force outside Iraq.

Then attempting a political solution as discussed in the New Yorker article, where the US has had success in cities like Al Tafar defeating the insurgentcy. In cases where the political solution doesn't work, we can bring in a large force to quell any uprising.

This seems to me to be a good solution. But I know this will never happen while gw is president.
>>I'm still trying to understand why some agree that the amount of money to investigate Clinton is called for. And there is no reason to investigate the current pres.
>
>He only just announced it yesterday. I would be willing to bet there will be hearings regarding this.

(On an infant's shirt): Already smarter than Bush
Previous
Next
Reply
Map
View

Click here to load this message in the networking platform