How Far Do We Let ISIS Go

[WarTim 3,456]

Oh no! Now you have done it! You have introduced facts into the conversation!!.......

[Mims44 1,867]

Iraq didn't go as well in the occupation stage.

Destroying their military, government structure, and toppling their tyrannical leader all went with unsurpassed ease.

And again, Vietnam was America beating America. check the numbers of total losses.

And I'm not saying Vietnam was a good decision, I'm saying America wrecks peoples s***... or at least used to.

LOL! No one has ever disputed we are adept at killing people and breaking things.

And that is why the Iraqi war was a success. The occupation was a long drawn out bunch of BS. The war was conducted very well and won quickly.

[homersapien 11,357]

Iraq didn't go as well in the occupation stage.

Destroying their military, government structure, and toppling their tyrannical leader all went with unsurpassed ease.

And again, Vietnam was America beating America. check the numbers of total losses.

And I'm not saying Vietnam was a good decision, I'm saying America wrecks peoples s***... or at least used to.

LOL! No one has ever disputed we are adept at killing people and breaking things.

And that is why the Iraqi war was a success. The occupation was a long drawn out bunch of BS. The war was conducted very well and won quickly.

Again, a war's success is not measured by tactical victories. We didn't go to war just to kill a bunch of Iraqi's and wreck their country. We went to overturn the regime and replace it with something better - primarily meaning a stable and representative government. That was the goal, not just shooting up the place.

[homersapien 11,357]

Oh no! Now you have done it! You have introduced facts into the conversation!!.......

And crucial facts at that. :-\

[Mims44 1,867]

Iraq didn't go as well in the occupation stage.

Destroying their military, government structure, and toppling their tyrannical leader all went with unsurpassed ease.

And again, Vietnam was America beating America. check the numbers of total losses.

And I'm not saying Vietnam was a good decision, I'm saying America wrecks peoples s***... or at least used to.

LOL! No one has ever disputed we are adept at killing people and breaking things.

And that is why the Iraqi war was a success. The occupation was a long drawn out bunch of BS. The war was conducted very well and won quickly.

Again, a war's success is not measured by tactical victories. We didn't go to war just to kill a bunch of Iraqi's and wreck their country. We went to overturn the regime and replace it with something better - primarily meaning a stable and representative government. That was the goal, not just shooting up the place.

The original goal was to topple, not to conquer.

The idea that we should also hand hold them and force our form of government down their throat was not the very original plan.

Although I guess you could argue a failure in that as well since we completed only a third of the original war goals.

1. topple government- check

2. remove saddam- check

3. remove WMDs - uhhhh yeah:/

If you judge wars based on every whim brought up at any time by either side, then nearly all wars are a loss by both sides. Surely you couldn't argue that Saddams Iraq won the war, they no longer exist.

And as far as America is concerned we are still at a better place than we were with Saddam at the reigns, Iraq might be just as scary, though from different people but enemies of Iraq have less to fear than before.

No one says the US lost the revolutionary war because England has a better economy and a better education system. We went out to "form a more perfect union".... you could argue that as a failure, but it doesn't mean we lost the war.

[Mims44 1,867]

Iraq didn't go as well in the occupation stage.

Destroying their military, government structure, and toppling their tyrannical leader all went with unsurpassed ease.

And again, Vietnam was America beating America. check the numbers of total losses.

And I'm not saying Vietnam was a good decision, I'm saying America wrecks peoples s***... or at least used to.

LOL! No one has ever disputed we are adept at killing people and breaking things.

And that is why the Iraqi war was a success. The occupation was a long drawn out bunch of BS. The war was conducted very well and won quickly.

Again, a war's success is not measured by tactical victories. We didn't go to war just to kill a bunch of Iraqi's and wreck their country. We went to overturn the regime and replace it with something better - primarily meaning a stable and representative government. That was the goal, not just shooting up the place.

The original goal was to topple, not to conquer.

The idea that we should also hand hold them and force our form of government down their throat was not the very original plan.

Although I guess you could argue a failure in that as well since we completed only a third of the original war goals.

1. topple government- check

2. remove saddam- check

3. remove WMDs - uhhhh yeah:/

If you judge wars based on every whim brought up at any time by either side, then nearly all wars are a loss by both sides. Surely you couldn't argue that Saddams Iraq won the war, they no longer exist.

And as far as America is concerned we are still at a better place than we were with Saddam at the reigns, Iraq might be just as scary, though from different people but enemies of Iraq have less to fear than before.

No one says the US lost the revolutionary war because England has a better economy and a better education system. We went out to "form a more perfect union".... you could argue that as a failure, but it doesn't mean we lost the war.

Might as well add this as well, It's not that I don't get your point... it's that I simply disagree with it.

recently had to read this graduates long as hell paper on why the Union did not truly win the Civil War. He brought up some very good points and it was well written. I disagree with it though, but can't fault him for having a different mindset from me.

[alexava 6,973]

This operation was called "Operation Iraqi freedom". Are Iraqis more free than before? We destroyed an entire country killed 100,000+ innocents and destabilized the region. Wrecked infrastructure that is still down. And 13 years later claim there were wmds that were kept secret for our security. Iraq was a complete failure from any reasonable point of view.

[Mims44 1,867]

This operation was called "Operation Iraqi freedom". Are Iraqis more free than before? We destroyed an entire country killed 100,000+ innocents and destabilized the region. Wrecked infrastructure that is still down. And 13 years later claim there were wmds that were kept secret for our security. Iraq was a complete failure from any reasonable point of view.

So we still have Saddam and possible WMDs with one of the largest standing armies in the world in Iraq right?

And Iraqis are more free than before, much more. Talked to a lot that weren't happy with how things were, never met one that said "damn, really wish Saddam was back"

[alexava 6,973]

This operation was called "Operation Iraqi freedom". Are Iraqis more free than before? We destroyed an entire country killed 100,000+ innocents and destabilized the region. Wrecked infrastructure that is still down. And 13 years later claim there were wmds that were kept secret for our security. Iraq was a complete failure from any reasonable point of view.

So we still have Saddam and possible WMDs with one of the largest standing armies in the world in Iraq right?

And Iraqis are more free than before, much more. Talked to a lot that weren't happy with how things were, never met one that said "damn, really wish Saddam was back"

i have the exact opposite experience. Not free at all. The insurgents that took over are worse than Saddam ever was. With Saddam they had water electricity, a somewhat normal life. Since all they have is war, uncertainty and lost lives. There may be pockets here and there that have different feelings but that place is overall an utter mess.

[Mims44 1,867]

This operation was called "Operation Iraqi freedom". Are Iraqis more free than before? We destroyed an entire country killed 100,000+ innocents and destabilized the region. Wrecked infrastructure that is still down. And 13 years later claim there were wmds that were kept secret for our security. Iraq was a complete failure from any reasonable point of view.

So we still have Saddam and possible WMDs with one of the largest standing armies in the world in Iraq right?

And Iraqis are more free than before, much more. Talked to a lot that weren't happy with how things were, never met one that said "damn, really wish Saddam was back"

i have the exact opposite experience. Not free at all. The insurgents that took over are worse than Saddam ever was. With Saddam they had water electricity, a somewhat normal life. Since all they have is war, uncertainty and lost lives. There may be pockets here and there that have different feelings but that place is overall an utter mess.

well, honestly... last time I was there ISIS/ISIL was not a thing.

Everything was looking up, democratic voting was in swing, elected officials taking the helm, insurgent numbers were dwindling from my 1st tour in '03-'05.

There was still discourse since it was a Shia faction taking the reigns, but it was akin to demos/repubs with... slightly more violence.

But that begs another question, how long would they have needed to enjoy a decent amount of stability to call it a success? Sure, theirs was very short... but had it been 1 more year could we have called it a success in your mind? or 5 more? 10 more?

[alexava 6,973]

This operation was called "Operation Iraqi freedom". Are Iraqis more free than before? We destroyed an entire country killed 100,000+ innocents and destabilized the region. Wrecked infrastructure that is still down. And 13 years later claim there were wmds that were kept secret for our security. Iraq was a complete failure from any reasonable point of view.

So we still have Saddam and possible WMDs with one of the largest standing armies in the world in Iraq right?

And Iraqis are more free than before, much more. Talked to a lot that weren't happy with how things were, never met one that said "damn, really wish Saddam was back"

i have the exact opposite experience. Not free at all. The insurgents that took over are worse than Saddam ever was. With Saddam they had water electricity, a somewhat normal life. Since all they have is war, uncertainty and lost lives. There may be pockets here and there that have different feelings but that place is overall an utter mess.

well, honestly... last time I was there ISIS/ISIL was not a thing.

Everything was looking up, democratic voting was in swing, elected officials taking the helm, insurgent numbers were dwindling from my 1st tour in '03-'05.

There was still discourse since it was a Shia faction taking the reigns, but it was akin to demos/repubs with... slightly more violence.

But that begs another question, how long would they have needed to enjoy a decent amount of stability to call it a success? Sure, theirs was very short... but had it been 1 more year could we have called it a success in your mind? or 5 more? 10 more?

i don't think it was a possibility.

[alexava 6,973]

Slightly more violence than democrats and republicans?

[Mims44 1,867]

Slightly more violence than democrats and republicans?

/joke

Still lots of arguements, but right in the middle of my tour it got to be very boring. No gunfire, mortars, only rarely IEDs.

And nearly no infighting to be seen. Of course all I know is what I read in the S&S and what I saw with my own eyes. If the media here was constantly blowing s*** out of proportion I'd have no idea about it.

[alexava 6,973]

mims44, i did not serve myself. i am speaking of what family and friends who did and what i read. the person who has told me the most about it had 2 tours one very early maybe 03-04ish he didnt say much about that tour then but the last one was pure hell. this was 07-09 ish. he retired in '12 from lingering complications on an injury. i understand some of the insurgents actually came from other countries. saddam was evil but not as bad as the terrorism they have seen since. he said we need to set up another ruthless dictator. that is the only authority that mindset will submit to. the people who might have been receptive to the "freedom" we promised had grown tired of perpetual violence and lack of basic utilities, electricity, water, food, health care. they blame us and dont trust us. i dont pretend to know it all but i dont think saddam was much of a threat. i damn sure dont think it was worth our losses and the loss of iraqi innocents which i dont think anyone can accurately quantify.

[Mims44 1,867]

'03-'05 was trash. was fun for me only because I was young, stupid, and immortal.

I was not motivated to go again because of it, but when I went back it was so much better.

My brother was there as well in 09-10, bored out of his mind... though he was an MP so dunno exactly what his job all entailed.

[homersapien 11,357]

Iraq didn't go as well in the occupation stage.

Destroying their military, government structure, and toppling their tyrannical leader all went with unsurpassed ease.

And again, Vietnam was America beating America. check the numbers of total losses.

And I'm not saying Vietnam was a good decision, I'm saying America wrecks peoples s***... or at least used to.

LOL! No one has ever disputed we are adept at killing people and breaking things.

And that is why the Iraqi war was a success. The occupation was a long drawn out bunch of BS. The war was conducted very well and won quickly.

Again, a war's success is not measured by tactical victories. We didn't go to war just to kill a bunch of Iraqi's and wreck their country. We went to overturn the regime and replace it with something better - primarily meaning a stable and representative government. That was the goal, not just shooting up the place.

The original goal was to topple, not to conquer.

The idea that we should also hand hold them and force our form of government down their throat was not the very original plan.

Although I guess you could argue a failure in that as well since we completed only a third of the original war goals.

1. topple government- check

2. remove saddam- check

3. remove WMDs - uhhhh yeah:/

If you judge wars based on every whim brought up at any time by either side, then nearly all wars are a loss by both sides. Surely you couldn't argue that Saddams Iraq won the war, they no longer exist.

And as far as America is concerned we are still at a better place than we were with Saddam at the reigns, Iraq might be just as scary, though from different people but enemies of Iraq have less to fear than before.

No one says the US lost the revolutionary war because England has a better economy and a better education system. We went out to "form a more perfect union".... you could argue that as a failure, but it doesn't mean we lost the war.

And that was the fatal oversight.

It's fine if you want to declare military success. But we are talking about war. War always has a political purpose, by definition. Without the political success, the military accomplishments are pointless.

[AUUSN 823]

And that was the fatal oversight.

It's fine if you want to declare military success. But we are talking about war. War always has a political purpose, by definition. Without the political success, the military accomplishments are pointless.

Carl approves of this post!

[homersapien 11,357]

And that was the fatal oversight.

It's fine if you want to declare military success. But we are talking about war. War always has a political purpose, by definition. Without the political success, the military accomplishments are pointless.

Carl approves of this post!

Sometimes this forum really baffles me. This is pretty basic stuff.

[cooltigger21 0]

This operation was called "Operation Iraqi freedom". Are Iraqis more free than before? We destroyed an entire country killed 100,000+ innocents and destabilized the region. Wrecked infrastructure that is still down. And 13 years later claim there were wmds that were kept secret for our security. Iraq was a complete failure from any reasonable point of view.

So we still have Saddam and possible WMDs with one of the largest standing armies in the world in Iraq right?

And Iraqis are more free than before, much more. Talked to a lot that weren't happy with how things were, never met one that said "damn, really wish Saddam was back"

i have the exact opposite experience. Not free at all. The insurgents that took over are worse than Saddam ever was. With Saddam they had water electricity, a somewhat normal life. Since all they have is war, uncertainty and lost lives. There may be pockets here and there that have different feelings but that place is overall an utter mess.

That's because we left before things were stabilized to the point where they could handle things themselves. If you are going to go in there, and whether or not we should have is a debatable point, then you have to see it through. We took down Hitler and Tojo but we didn't just say ok we won the war and now we're leaving, good luck to you. We also made the mistake of backing Al-Maliki, when there were warning signs that told us he was not the right man. It's too late to worry about what we should have done or not done previously. Now we have an obligation to the people there and most especially to ourselves to go in there and clean out that nest of rats once and for all. Screw the political correctness and let the military loose to do their job. We've constantly handuffed them and restricted them to the point of making it completely worthless.

[AUUSN 823]

This operation was called "Operation Iraqi freedom". Are Iraqis more free than before? We destroyed an entire country killed 100,000+ innocents and destabilized the region. Wrecked infrastructure that is still down. And 13 years later claim there were wmds that were kept secret for our security. Iraq was a complete failure from any reasonable point of view.

So we still have Saddam and possible WMDs with one of the largest standing armies in the world in Iraq right?

And Iraqis are more free than before, much more. Talked to a lot that weren't happy with how things were, never met one that said "damn, really wish Saddam was back"

i have the exact opposite experience. Not free at all. The insurgents that took over are worse than Saddam ever was. With Saddam they had water electricity, a somewhat normal life. Since all they have is war, uncertainty and lost lives. There may be pockets here and there that have different feelings but that place is overall an utter mess.

That's because we left before things were stabilized to the point where they could handle things themselves. If you are going to go in there, and whether or not we should have is a debatable point, then you have to see it through. We took down Hitler and Tojo but we didn't just say ok we won the war and now we're leaving, good luck to you. We also made the mistake of backing Al-Maliki, when there were warning signs that told us he was not the right man. It's too late to worry about what we should have done or not done previously. Now we have an obligation to the people there and most especially to ourselves to go in there and clean out that nest of rats once and for all. Screw the political correctness and let the military loose to do their job. We've constantly handuffed them and restricted them to the point of making it completely worthless.

This a comment from you I can get behind. Well said. We broke Iraq. We need to fix it.

[Strychnine 1,802]

This operation was called "Operation Iraqi freedom". Are Iraqis more free than before? We destroyed an entire country killed 100,000+ innocents and destabilized the region. Wrecked infrastructure that is still down. And 13 years later claim there were wmds that were kept secret for our security. Iraq was a complete failure from any reasonable point of view.

So we still have Saddam and possible WMDs with one of the largest standing armies in the world in Iraq right?

And Iraqis are more free than before, much more. Talked to a lot that weren't happy with how things were, never met one that said "damn, really wish Saddam was back"

i have the exact opposite experience. Not free at all. The insurgents that took over are worse than Saddam ever was. With Saddam they had water electricity, a somewhat normal life. Since all they have is war, uncertainty and lost lives. There may be pockets here and there that have different feelings but that place is overall an utter mess.

That's because we left before things were stabilized to the point where they could handle things themselves. If you are going to go in there, and whether or not we should have is a debatable point, then you have to see it through. We took down Hitler and Tojo but we didn't just say ok we won the war and now we're leaving, good luck to you. We also made the mistake of backing Al-Maliki, when there were warning signs that told us he was not the right man. It's too late to worry about what we should have done or not done previously. Now we have an obligation to the people there and most especially to ourselves to go in there and clean out that nest of rats once and for all. Screw the political correctness and let the military loose to do their job. We've constantly handuffed them and restricted them to the point of making it completely worthless.

This a comment from you I can get behind. Well said. We broke Iraq. We need to fix it.

We certainly broke Iraq, but I think the Arabic faces of coalition members are the better ones to clean out the rat nest. We absolutely need to continue supporting those efforts, and reinforce them when necessary. Keeping this coalition together is the best chance to meet our short and long term goals.

[Mims44 1,867]

Not handcuffing and restricting the military.... it'll never happen.

not in this day and age.

[homersapien 11,357]

Not handcuffing and restricting the military.... it'll never happen.

not in this day and age.

Yeah, who can imagine that restricting the military could ever be a good idea. :-\

[Mims44 1,867]

Not handcuffing and restricting the military.... it'll never happen.

not in this day and age.

Yeah, who can imagine that restricting the military could ever be a good idea. :-\

Not I, said the rooster.