Separate names with a comma.
Discussion in 'Politics, Religion, Social Issues' started by MACDRIVE, Dec 30, 2006.
I think SGT. Josh Keim said it best.
The mission is to save Bush's legacy and the oil fields as far as I'm concerned. Nothing else makes sense at this point. Now that Saddam is dead, it's gonna get a lot worse.
Oh wait, sorry. Democracy is suddenly going to appear in Iraq, and all will be well.
Driving around with no mission but presenting themself as nice big American targets for Both sides..........Bush being brilliant once again for those WMDs that Iraq didnt have.
The Mission in Iraq is to stand around until Iraq gets over its civil war of a thousand years?
Whatever happened to Osama the "real" 911 guy?
I asked my brother about this after his first tour (he's infantry). He said that it's not the amount of troops, but that they don't know who the enemy is. They have no idea who will attack them.
Seems to me the mission of the post-combat phase is unchanged: Create a stable government in Iraq that's friendly to the U.S.
It's obvious that the methodology hasn't worked. Lord knows, that's been thrashed out here umpteen times.
Hindsight shows that those who advised Bush to wait until more troops were available before going into Iraq were correct--but that's been obvious for quite a while. Those additional troops might have enabled better control of the borders with Syria and Iran. Maybe.
Given the present situation, I pretty much doubt that just adding numbers will be all that helpful.
I'm not anywhere near sure that a stable government for a single-country Iraq will be possible, for that matter. Too much polarization, looks like.
the mission is to create excuse for putting more troops there.
I think the mission is short term domestic US politics. The mission in Iraq has never been a priority.