Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member Latest Breaking News Editorials & Other Articles General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search
 

happyslug

(14,779 posts)
9. The US took Iraq, the US just could NOT hold Iraq
Tue Nov 4, 2014, 02:53 PM
Nov 2014

There is a difference between those two positions. One can take something with a lot less troops then is needed to hold whatever you took.

Remember the conquest of Iraq took less then a month. US Troops held all of Iraq including Baghdad within that time period. Saudi Arabia can do the same to day (so can Iran). Saudi Arabia and Iran have refused to do so for they know they do NOT have the troops to hold Iraq (Iran MAY have the troops and the support from inside Iraq, but Saudi Arabia clearly does not have the troops or the support in Iraq).

The problem is HOLDING Iraq. That is where the US failed. The General Rule of thumb is it take three times as many troops to hold something then to take it. The US NEVER put in the troops needed to hold Iraq (It would have required a return of the draft). Thus the US TOOK IRAQ, but failed to hold it. That is the lesson everyone is learned about the US intervention.

Recommendations

0 members have recommended this reply (displayed in chronological order):

Latest Discussions»Latest Breaking News»Egypt, Gulf Arab allies e...»Reply #9