Have we lost the War in Iraq?

[rooddood743]

First, a bit from a Guardian UK article:

In raids with names such as Iron Hammer, Ivy Cyclone and Rifles Blitz, the US military has displayed some of its most formidable and technologically advanced firepower, including F-16 fighter jets, AC-130 Spectre gunships, satellite-guided bombs and Apache attack helicopters.

Yet yesterday, their opponents managed to lead a donkey cart carrying a rocket launcher to within 300 yards of the two most heavily guarded hotels in the city.

http://www.guardian.co.uk/Iraq/Story/0,2763,1090856,00.html

Anyone remember, a short time ago some war games our military was conducting? This U.S. General was playing "enemy" against other U.S. forces, simulating unsophisticated, terrorist type attacks.

Anyway, this general- using crude tactics- kept kicking the shit out of our guys who were using the high-tech warfare systems we really use in combat. Does anyone remember this? Every time this General won, they would change the rules of the game...He kept winning, so they eventually got rid of him.

I remember thinking at the time how foolish this was. You want to make your mistakes during the practice, so you can learn from them. These jerk-offs seemed determined not to learn a damn thing, and now our guys are paying for it in Iraq.

First comes smiles, then lies. Last is gunfire.-Roland Deschain

[onebigbadwulf]

1. You can't win a guerilla war. It's that simple.

[Scott Lee]

13. Agree. I hate to echo Kissinger's take on this, but...

He was right this time. He said "Guerillas win by not losing, while occupiers lose by not winning."

[Lexingtonian]

2. Not quite.

We've won the war, but we've lost Iraq.

In military vs. political definitions, of course. But the political one is the one that counts.

[jumptheshadow]

3. Yes, indeed

We have paid a dear price in blood, cash and credibility to create the next Islamic state that will hate the U.S. and export terrorists to our shores.

[Capt_Nemo]

8. Not quite, Lexingtonian

By the same standards the Soviets "won the war but lost Afghanistan"

The fact of the matter is that the regime they set up there collapsed
3 years after they left. So they ultimately lost the war, for the
political objectives, they pursued by military means, failed.

The war has not ended and it's not looking good for the US...

[izzie]

11. You can not control the minds of people. Might can not do it.

We have 7000 years of history of the Generals trying and it has never worked for long. All we have to do is sit back and watch it. Some like to fight the down fall before we are all pulled into the mess.Some Dem also like to fight it. I am not sure about all in our party.

[radfringe]

4. lost the war?

we succeeded in the invasion of Iraq, and Saddam is still out there but no longer in control - so if you use that as yardstick - then we won

But - Saddam is still out there, we have daily deaths, and daily attacks on "secured" zones - using this as a yardstick - we haven't won shit and the war continues

better to ask if Baghdad-Bush has a plan to stabilize the region

if such a plan exists in any comprehensive manner - it's based on politics for the 2004 campaign season and has little to do with "winning the peace"

any war has three main parts:

1. defeating the "enemy" and territorial control
2. stabilize the "war zone" region - getting things back to "normal"
3. establishment of governmental control - this would be by either the "victor" taking over or turning power over to an acceptable government

technically - we defeated the enemy when Saddam fled, the Iraqi military was dismantled and we have territorial control. But we still have attacks going on from "insurgents" etc. So did we really defeat the "enemy"?

the "war zone" (for lack of a better term) is not stable - again the daily attacks and deaths

establishment of governmental control - yes and no; Yes if you define it as Bremer being in charge, NO if control has been turned over to an Iraqi government

overall - we are treading water, sharks are circling and taking nips at our feet

[madmom]

16. lost the war

how can you say Saddam is no longer in control? Somebody is doing a hell of a job at keeping us at bay. Some one is in control and it ain't Bush.

[lindashaw]

5. Here's a description of Vietnam...you be the judge.

Henry Cabot Lodge said, "We have everything we need in Vietnam. The United States has provided military advice, training, equipment, economic and social help, and political advice. The government of Vietnam has put a relatively large number of good men into important positions and has evolved civil and military procedures that seem to be workable. Therefore, our side knows how to do it. We have the means with which to do it. We simply need to do it."

Sound familiar?

[9215]

18. Excellent reply

And it blew up in our faces.

[DrBB]

6. Anyone read "Snow Crash"?

A central theme is the defeat of high tech power by low tech means. Points out that even as high tech gadgetry amplifies our power and perception, it also creates blindspots by fostering an illusion of omnipotence. He continually skewers and satirizes those who rely on technology to the exclusion of all else. Not luddite--quite the opposite, in fact--just pointing up the fact that this stuff can obscure as well as reveal what's really going on.

This donkey-missile event could have come right out of that novel.

[rogerashton]

7. Neither won nor lost.

It seems that Saddam knew that he could not resist successfully by conventional means if (when) the invasion came. So he adopted a fallback strategy, quite some time ago: put up a token resistance, hide what he could, and prepare for a guerilla war. Evidence is the very existence of the Fedayeen, a kind of force that Saddam, with his Stalin identity, would not willingly trust or tolerate -- but would be necessary for guerilla resistance. This also meant that there would be no resources available for "WMD" and that is the real reason there are none -- and also the reason, S hid that fact, since the furore over WMD diverted attention from his real plans.

Bottom line -- W has been outsmarted by Saddam as he was by Osama. A massive superiority in conventional weapons, deployed with inferior brain power, has allowed both of those quite different villains to hurt us and salvage all they could from the US attacks. We need a president who is smarter than the opposition.

[Jacobin]

9. We lost before we invaded

There has been no surrender. There will be no end to the fighting. Our troops and civilians are all living behind 20 foot concrete blast walls.

We are being squeezed into little protected pockets that are being attacked by rockets.

We'll be run out, just like we were in Vietnam. Only a matter of time.

[Capt_Nemo]

10. The tactics are not "crude", they are "lo-tech"

Which are quite different things.

Low-tech concepts can be quite sophisticated...

[dbt]

12. What Jacobin said in Number Nine!

We lost this one on the day we went in. We would have to patrol every square inch of Iraq to be assured of "victory" and we sent in nowhere near enough troops for the occupation to work.

Burn in Hell, Rummy! You sent those men and women to their deaths for oil and you know it!

:grr:
dbt

[IndianaGreen]

14. Yes, and I am glad we did!

Had Bush won his filthy illegal war in Iraq, our troops would be getting ready today to invade another country in the Middle East or in Latin America.

The Iraq quagmire has soured the troops on whatever 9-11 revenge fantasies they may have had, and may sap them of any desire to reenlist in Bush's Imperial Army.

Death to American Imperialism! End the Occupation! Bring the troops home!

[Mattforclark]

15. Yes, I remember that war game...

It happened last summer. What's happening now isn't as bad as what Van Ripen accomplished in the war game - he sank AIRCRAFT CARRIERS. Not to minimize what is happening now, of course.

http://exile.ru/156/156032003.html

[leftofthedial]

17. we lost the moment the invasion started.

invaders may win on the battlefield, but they lose in the history books.

[Ksec]

19. technically no, politically yes

We have let people down by not having a plan. And now we have new recruits of terrorists because Bush flubbed.