How come we can't control New Orleans, or Washington DC, the murder capital of the US? Or how about Detroit? Los Angeles? New York?
2006-09-21 19:00:23
·
answer #1
·
answered by Anonymous
·
0⤊
0⤋
ddddd, you are a liar and a fraud. There is absolutely no way based on your question history you were ever on an ODA. Anyone from Group or from a combat arms branch can see your infantile questions don't reflect on the knowledge someone from an 18-series MOS would have. You are a disgrace to the human race.
As for the question:
(1) Baghdad IS under control: Just not all of it. You have to remember it is both the largest city in Iraq with population density disproportionate to any other location in the country, and that the transfer of authority to Iraqi security forces means that the American military does NOT maintain a presence everywhere.
(2) Sectarian violence (i.e. from the Shia-controlled Interior Ministry, to Sunni paramilitary kidnap and death squads) initiated by various factions is prevalent, but it has not brought Iraq to the brink of collapse. The definition of collapse is what happened to Kabul after the Soviets left and the Mujahideen tore it apart over a decade. Baghdad has not reached anywhere near that point.
By the way, I was there. It's not as bad as you make it sound like, and what is happening in Baghdad is NOT what is happening across the country. The situation in a city like Kirkuk is different from Baghdad. It's just that the news services are all concentrated in the center, and hardly see the countryside.
There's still a chance for Iraq. If a place like Mozambique can find peace, then Iraq has a chance.
2006-09-22 13:15:35
·
answer #2
·
answered by Nat 5
·
0⤊
0⤋
Baghdad has a population of about 6.5 million people. It is also big enough to dump bodies from other areas of the country and not get caught. Once the police get caught up, things will smooth down. It really was that bad in New York and Chicago during the gang fighting there during the turn of last century. It tool them about 60 years to just get the gang fighting somewhat under control.
2006-09-21 19:54:13
·
answer #3
·
answered by gregory_dittman 7
·
1⤊
0⤋
The news coverage, and vocal opposition. This has made Iraq, and Baghdad a focal point for all the world's prospective Martyrs. Muslim fanatics from all over the world see going to Iraq as a sure fire place to get their ticket to paradise punched. Also, that type of mentality ensures they don't care HOW they die, or who they take along. Military conduct, and rules of engagement are set up to make every attempt to avoid collateral death. (I know, I know, there are exceptions)
2006-09-21 22:30:02
·
answer #4
·
answered by Anonymous
·
0⤊
0⤋
the trouble in controlling something like baghdad is that its more like periodic outbursts of guerilla attacks, and not a maintained observable force that can be predicted and annihilated. Its much harder to fight something intangible then a solid distinguishable mass, for example a small Jewish ghetto resisted Hitler's onslaught longer than the entire country of Poland.
2006-09-21 19:05:07
·
answer #5
·
answered by kellerxiii 2
·
0⤊
0⤋
You can not control a people that does not want to be controlled. For example the American Revolution the British tried to control the colonist like we try to control the people in Iraq, and from history you can see haw well that works, we are here.
2006-09-21 20:10:38
·
answer #6
·
answered by Sir CJ 3
·
0⤊
0⤋
Dwight Eisenhower warned of a industrial military complex in his farewell speech as president.John F Kennedy was" removed " after he tried to at least control this growing scurge.Now you have Cheney, Rumsfeld & Wolfiwiecz the chief architects of the complex making important decisions on policy.Each one of these neo-cons personal fortunes has risen substantially.This would be called conflict of interest if anyone was paying attention.To answer your question,the war will continue as long as the select few profit from it.
2006-09-21 19:22:35
·
answer #7
·
answered by guvner_46 3
·
0⤊
1⤋
Eisenhower and Kennedy warned us about a military industrial complex taking over way back as far as 1949. A police state has been in the works long ago. It makes economic sense, if you support an oligarchy, to subdue the greatest economic engine the world has ever seen through the use of propaganda and lies. Happened before didnt it? (see WWII Germany)
2006-09-21 19:03:18
·
answer #8
·
answered by metalsoft@sbcglobal.net 2
·
1⤊
1⤋
the answer is that we are no longer going to win the conflict. in reality one-0.33 of Baghdad below administration even with the troop surge? supply it up already. Get the troops out of damage's way before more advantageous of them are needlessly killed.
2016-11-23 14:31:38
·
answer #9
·
answered by Anonymous
·
0⤊
0⤋
Sadam kept his population of tribal factions and rivalry and outright hatred of each other, under an artificial control by brute force and absolute terror, it is up to the people of iraq through the influence of the mullahs(religious leaders) for them to set aside centuries of blind tradition and step up and determine if and why they want to get along and put aside tribal mentality for that of a national identity. there are foreign policy experts that say it will take as long as two generations to weed out the old and entrenched. remember that democracy requires its participants to think for themselves rather than just react and be mushrooms(stay in th dark and be given bull ****{fertilizer} this whole concept of democracy is unique and foreign to them and theere is a tremendous power struggle ensuing,the greatest threat to these mullahs (who yield incredible politcal and religious influence )is people who don't need the mullahs to think for them and what happens to these once powerful men when they lose power and influece, they go to any length to re establish control and convince others to be loyal to them reinforcing the old ways and ignorant traditions
2006-09-21 19:26:09
·
answer #10
·
answered by Anonymous
·
0⤊
0⤋