English Deutsch Français Italiano Español Português 繁體中文 Bahasa Indonesia Tiếng Việt ภาษาไทย
All categories

(news article) http://news.yahoo.com/s/csm/20070601/ts_csm/atoll

Senior Military Analyst Michael O'Hanlon in Washington:

"If that [a sustained level of violence from insurgents and terrorists] continues, what it means is that you're not actually weakening them, but you're just allowing them to regenerate, and they are capable of doing so...If the intensity continues ... then it looks like a strategy that is ultimately futile...It is possible that you could have progress and not see US fatality rates go down for a while, but I think it's relatively hard to imagine that we would start losing 100 people a month for the summer and be able to term this strategy successful."

(more below)

2007-06-01 09:16:02 · 5 answers · asked by What I Say 3 in News & Events Current Events

"Staying the course" by increasing troops has not done a damn thing for years. More and more soldiers die and you don't hear about any significant improvement to security threats. Not only does increasing U.S. losses question the "success" of military operations, the numbers of casualties (curiously never includes the wounded) reported by the media is apparently not just the "toll" of the war. It's the toll of a questionable strategy. Why doesn't anyone look to the president or our military leadership when it comes to who is really not supporting the troops with their actions? All the talk from Bush about "support our troops" is just a bunch of words given the way they are being pointlessly sacrificed.


~

2007-06-01 09:16:35 · update #1

5 answers

Nope.

2007-06-01 09:41:00 · answer #1 · answered by Anonymous · 1 0

The 'strategy' is twofold:

1. Continue and increase payments to corporations providing war materiel and services;

2. Keep the thing going until W is safely out of office.

Nothing else figures into the situation.

2007-06-01 10:16:25 · answer #2 · answered by nora22000 7 · 0 0

Well, I think what Bush sees in the long term, if we can just stick it out, is a democratic vassal state that will give him a platform for a permanent military force in the oily region. I think it is unlikely to turn out that way, and that our next president will win on a platform that includes leaving Iraq with those objectives unattained.

2007-06-01 09:52:11 · answer #3 · answered by Anonymous · 1 0

yes, flood the country with illegal aliens

2007-06-01 18:35:36 · answer #4 · answered by Anonymous · 0 0

When you see a strategy in this failed war of ours, please let me know. :0)

2007-06-01 09:22:14 · answer #5 · answered by Anonymous · 2 1

fedest.com, questions and answers