Road to victory in Iraq 'unclear,' US auditors conclude by Maxim Kniazkov
WASHINGTON (AFP) - The investigative arm of the US Congress has openly questioned if victory in Iraq can be achieved without a significant overhaul of President George W. Bush's strategy, arguing the outcome of the war was presently "unclear".
The findings by the Government Accountability Office mark the first time a non-partisan US government agency publicly doubted whether the geo-strategic undertaking that Bush made the defining element of his presidency, could be successful.
"It is unclear how the United States will achieve its desired end-state in Iraq given the significant changes in the assumptions underlying the US strategy," the GAO wrote in its report unveiled Tuesday at a hearing in the House of Representatives. "We're not making headway" the GAO wrote. Also it appears the Marines and Army men are dying for a cause that will turn out to be worthless the GAO states.
2006-07-12 00:42:50 · 15 answers · asked by Anonymous in Politics & Government ➔ Military
We're fighting terrorism! It isn't supposed to have an end-state. It's like fighting bacteria. You can't kill them all, but you can kill enough of them that you can live without expecting towers to fall on your head!
Where did you get this argument? It isn't like fighting a country. Your political awareness of the nature of war is over simplified.
You are wasting our time.
2006-07-12 09:06:10 · answer #1 · answered by mckenziecalhoun 7 · 0⤊ 1⤋
Please define 'defeat' ! If it was to over-throw Saddam then yes it was a victory. If it is to defeat a guerrilla terrorist army then yes it will be a defeat I am sorry to tell you. It has been historically impossible for a conventional army to defeat bandits/insurgents/terrorists in their own back-yard. By definition they have the support of , some, if not all of the local population. The British in Afghanistan in the 19th Century, The British in N.Ireland, The Germans in France and Eastern Europe in World War II, The French in Vietnam, Americans in Vietnam and obviously the Americans and British in current day Afghanistan and Iraq. The more you kill the more you create. They melt away into the urban or rural background where rockets and tanks are useless. Look at your history folks. It is all about history trust me.
2006-07-12 08:06:58 · answer #2 · answered by Teacher 4 · 0⤊ 0⤋
it proves that everytime america puts republicans in charge we pay a very heavy price.it proves g.bush is the antichrist.it proves all republicans are idiots;if you cant win in iraq which is the size of the state of california then you really cannot win against anyother country either.it shows how weak and vunurable america is on concerning defense and strong men.i do'nt care as long as pvt.carl wood is the 1st solider to get his head completely blown off by an iraqie the ugly small penis 1 second i have had homosexual experiences married to the ugliest oldest woman ever fake *** solider who is stationed in fort bragg,north carolina;please iraq shove a wmd right up pvt.carl wood's ***!!!!!!!!!
2006-07-12 07:52:16 · answer #3 · answered by elibralover 2 · 0⤊ 0⤋
You know what's really funny? Republicans that talk about how liberal our media is, then go on to quote news like the Times and the Post saying, "even these lefties are reporting this" knowing full well they can't quote Fox News because its what makes the center look like the radical left.
2006-07-12 08:02:43 · answer #4 · answered by Jared H 3 · 0⤊ 0⤋
It means they are going to throw much more money and effort into pacifying the country, look for massive carpet bombings and mine field laying in the near future. Also much more on the body-count file a la french indochina/ vietnam
2006-07-12 08:29:21 · answer #5 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
2 points
2006-07-12 08:53:42 · answer #6 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
What do you expect from a president that used daddy's influence to learn to fly his fighter jet and then NOT fly in Vietnam? As for Chaney, the a**hole got a differment from going to Vietnam himself SIX TIMES
2006-07-12 07:48:51 · answer #7 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
This is getting funnier by the minute, W's driving the anti-war liberals crazy by allowing the military to run the war!!
2006-07-12 08:03:11 · answer #8 · answered by sealss3006 4 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Republicans have to distance themselves from the White House until after the Midterm elections - then they will revert back to their Evil Master.
2006-07-12 07:48:38 · answer #9 · answered by jonnygaijin 5 · 0⤊ 0⤋
of course! we are being treated as liberators and they are throwing flowers at us in the streets...and, buy the way...the was is costing us nothings as Itaq is paying for it with their oil .
I remeber hearing all that somewhere!
2006-07-12 08:53:32 · answer #10 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋