Military History | How To Make War | Wars Around the World Rules of Use How to Behave on an Internet Forum
On Point Discussion Board
   Return to Topic Page
Subject: Counter ISIL's Truck Bombs with Real Close Air Support
SYSOP    5/26/2015 11:03:43 PM
 
Quote    Reply

Show Only Poster Name and Title     Newest to Oldest
robbief1       5/27/2015 5:17:05 PM
If you accept this analysis - http://intelnews.org/2015/05/27/01-1704/ -
then why should the US risk its soldiers lives to help
a) Iran and b) Hezbollah
that are subjugating and massacring Syrians
and storing massive quantities of rockets, in civilian homes, on Lebanon's border with Israel?
 
Quote    Reply

ker       5/28/2015 3:31:58 PM
Meanwile back at the firing line. .. Our nominal alies who are the solution to ISIL by the administrations public statements have a fatal lack of anti-improvised armored vehical capasity. We could talk about failure to block Iranian Iinfluence at another time. That failure should not be used as an excuse to not face the topic of this artical. Both failures stem in part from the lie that we could leave and not pay a big price for it. The administration acted as if we could leave Iraq and never go back. They could have made a case for staying like we did in South Korea and had a much easyer time with all these events but they themselves poisioned that well with years of reckless political propoganda that put them in office.
 
Quote    Reply

FormerMarine       5/30/2015 3:53:54 AM
@import url(http://www.strategypage.com/CuteSoft_Client/CuteEditor/Load.ashx?type=style&file=SyntaxHighlighter.css);
Meanwile back at the firing line. .. Our nominal alies who are the solution to ISIL by the administrations public statements have a fatal lack of anti-improvised armored vehical capasity. We could talk about failure to block Iranian Iinfluence at another time. That failure should not be used as an excuse to not face the topic of this artical. Both failures stem in part from the lie that we could leave and not pay a big price for it. The administration acted as if we could leave Iraq and never go back. They could have made a case for staying like we did in South Korea and had a much easyer time with all these events but they themselves poisioned that well with years of reckless political propoganda that put them in office.
Staying in Iraq - the Bush Administration energetically and actively negotiated the treaties and plans under which we withdrew. They touted them as proof that we had completed the mission and our military presence was no longer needed. 
 
And, since the illegal invasion was the US greatest strategic mistake that wasted thousands of US soldiers lives and Trillion$ of dollars, destabilized the region and brought us the new Middle East keeping forces there would have been adding farce to folly.
 
I find it amusing to read the discussions here in an alternate reality where "we won the Iraq War". There is no rational argument to be made that we cam out as anything other that losers yet you guys sit here in your echo chamber and try and make yourselves out as master historians and strategists when your nothing more than a bunch of wankers impressing no one but each other. 
 
 
 
 
Quote    Reply

FormerMarine       5/30/2015 3:59:10 AM
@import url(http://www.strategypage.com/CuteSoft_Client/CuteEditor/Load.ashx?type=style&file=SyntaxHighlighter.css);
Meanwile back at the firing line. .. Our nominal alies who are the solution to ISIL by the administrations public statements have a fatal lack of anti-improvised armored vehical capasity. We could talk about failure to block Iranian Iinfluence at another time. That failure should not be used as an excuse to not face the topic of this artical. Both failures stem in part from the lie that we could leave and not pay a big price for it. The administration acted as if we could leave Iraq and never go back. They could have made a case for staying like we did in South Korea and had a much easyer time with all these events but they themselves poisioned that well with years of reckless political propoganda that put them in office.
Staying in Iraq - the Bush Administration energetically and actively negotiated the treaties and plans under which we withdrew. They touted them as proof that we had completed the mission and our military presence was no longer needed. 
 
And, since the illegal invasion was the US greatest strategic mistake that wasted thousands of US soldiers lives and Trillion$ of dollars, destabilized the region and brought us the new Middle East keeping forces there would have been adding farce to folly.
 
I find it amusing to read the discussions here in an alternate reality where "we won the Iraq War". There is no rational argument to be made that we cam out as anything other that losers yet you guys sit here in your echo chamber and try and make yourselves out as master historians and strategists when your nothing more than a bunch of wankers impressing no one but each other. 
 
 
 
 
Quote    Reply

FormerMarine       5/30/2015 9:26:54 AM
@import url(http://www.strategypage.com/CuteSoft_Client/CuteEditor/Load.ashx?type=style&file=SyntaxHighlighter.css);
Meanwile back at the firing line. .. Our nominal alies who are the solution to ISIL by the administrations public statements have a fatal lack of anti-improvised armored vehical capasity. We could talk about failure to block Iranian Iinfluence at another time. That failure should not be used as an excuse to not face the topic of this artical. Both failures stem in part from the lie that we could leave and not pay a big price for it. The administration acted as if we could leave Iraq and never go back. They could have made a case for staying like we did in South Korea and had a much easyer time with all these events but they themselves poisioned that well with years of reckless political propoganda that put them in office.
Staying in Iraq - the Bush Administration energetically and actively negotiated the treaties and plans under which we withdrew. They touted them as proof that we had completed the mission and our military presence was no longer needed. 
 
And, since the illegal invasion was the US greatest strategic mistake that wasted thousands of US soldiers lives and Trillion$ of dollars, destabilized the region and brought us the new Middle East keeping forces there would have been adding farce to folly.
 
I find it amusing to read the discussions here in an alternate reality where "we won the Iraq War". There is no rational argument to be made that we cam out as anything other that losers yet you guys sit here in your echo chamber and try and make yourselves out as master historians and strategists when your nothing more than a bunch of wankers impressing no one but each other. 
 
 
 
 
Quote    Reply

CJH       5/30/2015 9:47:33 AM
Maybe this is a dumb question, but, US ground spotters aside, don't the Iraqis have an air force and their own spotters? How taxing could it be for the Iraqis to muster up their own means to take out the bulldozer from the air?<p>
And are there no A-10s in the Iraqi air force?<a>
And what about shoulder fired anti-tank weapons?<p>
Wouldn't napalm take out the dozer? 
 
Quote    Reply

CJH       5/30/2015 10:00:01 AM
About the lack of US support on the Iraq front - I can't help but wonder whether ISIS is being used by outside powers and is therefore too valuable.<p>
Of course one might suppose that US ground spotters would not be reliably protected by Iraqis and thereby become potential targets for capture and ransom and that that risk indicates the need for force protection which indicates US military ground troops.<p>
"Smart power" is necessarily 60s era Mcnamaran power (graduated response) is necessarily minimalist power.<p>
Obama's real war is being fought here in the US against Americans. 
 
Quote    Reply

CJH       5/30/2015 10:10:05 AM
Our leftists friends are still playing their "Bush lied, people died" record which followed the "but we failed to go to Baghdad" post-1991 broken record.<p>
They hate that a conservative talking US president deposed one of their fellow travelers even showing bumper stickers urging "regime change" here immediately following the invasion.<p>
But Bush's invasion of Iraq was red meat for leftists who had previously been relegated to attacking Bush's record as governor on capital punishment or to attacking him as the "selected president".<p>
There is no intelligent life on the Left apparently. 
 
Quote    Reply



 Latest
 News
 
 Most
 Read
 
 Most
 Commented
 Hot
 Topics