have the americans under-estimated iraq?

Question

in

i think they're facing the republic gaurd now

Answer 1

I's say the U.S. bit off more than it can chew, judging by evidence at hand.

Answer 2

The Anericans expected no resistance and was not planning for anything beyond the invasion. They thought the Iraqis would be too happy that they have librated, have some of their people killed and won't bother fighting back during and after the invasion.

They did not take cognisance of the different reliegious groups in Iraq and their long internal war and hatred for each other. And immediately after the invasion each group was trying to outwit the other for control of Iraq, with America in the middle.

Until Americans are able to bring the different reliegious groups in Iraq together under some kind of compromise arrangement, there would never be peace in Iraq. A unity government with a collegiate leadership would be better.

Answer 3

Right now it's not Iraq that the US is fighting. Most of the terrorists (insurgents) are coming from Iran, Syria and Saudi Arabia.

I truly believe the Iraqi people want peace in their land. Who wants to live in a country where cars, buses and buildings are blown apart every day and innocent people are killed. A country where it's not safe to go to the grocery store.

Yet with all this violence....isn't it amazing that there is no shortage of volunteers for the Iraq police force or the Iraq army? The Iraqi people are a strong, determined people who want freedom. Life IS better there without Saddam, regardless of what some morons in the USA would have you believe.

Answer 4

well obviously they underestimated how much sectarian animosity existed in Iraq and the difficulty in keeping a lid on the violence and maintaining peace. The military was well-prepared for its task of beating the Iraqi military, but there was an inadequate plan for the aftermath, and power vacuum in Iraq following the invasion.

However this is not a military failure so much as a political one. The US army has been undefeated in combat for over 100 years but politically the US has lost wars like Vietnam and perhaps this one.

Definitely underestimated the difficulty of occupying/peacekeeping operations in a post-saddam Iraq

Answer 5

What I see is that the army is ill equiped to function as police in another country.
The army has no problem with military objectives, but they simply are not able to be the cop on every street corner.
It's just the wrong job for an army.
As long as Muslims want to kill Muslims, that is what is going to happen there no matter what we do.

Answer 6

Yes.
At the moment the US is not in control of the outcome in Iraq.
The number of troops in hindsight did not give them the chance to control an area in a sustained way so that they could put pressure on the large number of different groups out to attack them.
In hindsight they did not appreciate that the Al Qaida group would force out the UN. Would attack fellow Iraqis as at the Samara Mosque, so as to render the country ungovernable.
In hindsight they did not understand that all reconstruction giving the Iraqis a future would be blocked by the terrorists.

The US also has taken it's hands off the levers of power in the region.

The option of forcing or even considering partition is off the table.

Answer 7

Nope, Iraq ain't sh*t. The problem is they are trying to fight a limited politically correct war. Wars can never be won that why. They never would have won WWII that way.

Answer 8

No...all along its the "rules of engagement" that has held back the beating hand.
Reverse the roles...and think of war fought without rules.
Boy...all of our troops would be at home now, sippin' egg nog and brandy.

Answer 9

yes to a point it is almost like Vietnam over again the guerrilla war fare. we do not fight that type of war fare as easily as the military would like us to think

Answer 10

yes.
i'm being a dic answering all your questions. can i have 10 points. don't make me answer another.