Yanks hit Pattaya 10 JUNE !!

[chuckwoww]

There's the key paragraph...

 

"Active-duty casualties have spiked during major battles such as the attack on Fallujah, largely carried out by Army and Marine troops. But such engagements have rarely been waged since President Bush declared major combat over in May 2003."

 

The lesson of Fallujah is obvious. Stay away from offensive operations (or let the airforce handle it) and you won't take casualties. And let reservists drive the trucks.

[Flashermac]

The federal government cut the military so much -- especially under Clinton, but also under GWB -- that the reserve and Guard simply have to go to war. Not enough regulars to carrying out the mission on their own.

[chuckwoww]

Flashermac said:

The federal government cut the military so much -- especially under Clinton, but also under GWB -- that the reserve and Guard simply have to go to war. Not enough regulars to carrying out the mission on their own.

 

How many regulars do you think they need to 'win' in Iraq?

[Old Hippie]

I don't think we can "Win" in Iraq.

[chuckwoww]

Old Hippie said:

I don't think we can "Win" in Iraq.

 

Neither do I. That's why I put 'win' in inverted commas. I suppose a US tank on every street corner would be counted as a 'win' by some. Likewise Iraqis killing each other would be considered a 'win'.

[Flashermac]

What does "win" mean in Iraq? Isn't the purpose to establish some sort of government that wil keep the Iraqis from killing each other? That's a rather strange goal.

[chuckwoww]

Flashermac said:

What does "win" mean in Iraq? Isn't the purpose to establish some sort of government that wil keep the Iraqis from killing each other? That's a rather strange goal.

 

I depresses me to think about Iraq but for some reason I can't stop. Maybe because I lived and worked there once and have good memories.

 

"Win"? Probably means different things depending who you ask. The Bush version of a "win" seems to change every week but basically I think they want a compliant government, permanent bases and access to cheap oil. Insurgents want US troops out. Al Quaida want to blow them up. The Sunnis want Saddam back, the Shia want an Islamic state and the Kurds want independence (plus the Kirkuk fields). Ordinary Iraqis would probably settle for water, electricity and an end to the violence. I expect most Israelis are just happy to see Arabs killing each other.

[MaiLuk]

Winning IMO would be to bring our troops home. Right now. The administration demonstrated some serious incompetence putting our troops in their to begin with and now we have 20,000 casualties.

 

But that is not the worst of it. The incompetent fucks now say we have to stay in iraq. Otherwise the al quaida types will take over iraq, then using the oil revenues will spread their jihad to iraq's neighbors and who knows they may succeed in establishing a caliphate all the way to Spain. Sort of like "We must invade iraq cause they got all these WMDs."

 

However, all politicians in the US and in both parties (with some rare exceptions) agree that the US must remain in iraq. The doomsday scenario of a caliphate has everyone kowtowed. So our troops will have to endure another 20,000 casualties at least before someone says time to pack our bags.

[MaiLuk]

>>If I were going into the military today, unless I was going Army combat arms I'd definitely go Marine. <<

 

I would go marines even if i were going into combat arms. And i'm a former army infantry guy ::

 

The Army has some strack units but also has some useless almost unusable divisions. If you end up in one of the shitty units and sent into combat you might be unhappy. Marines OTOH all have good discipline.

[Old Hippie]

I'd be 100% REMF all the way! Coast guard administration, Airforce Mechanic...or some job downtown...holding down a nice chair in an office, on a nice safe base...or better yet home in the USA...